__________________________________________________________________
Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 1: Aachen-Assize
Creator(s): Herbermann, Charles George (1840-1916)
Print Basis: 1907-1913
Rights: From online edition Copyright 2003 by K. Knight, used by
permission
CCEL Subjects: All; Reference
LC Call no: BX841.C286
LC Subjects:
Christian Denominations
Roman Catholic Church
Dictionaries. Encyclopedias
__________________________________________________________________
THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA
AN INTERNATIONAL WORK OF REFERENCE
ON THE CONSTITUTION, DOCTRINE,
DISCIPLINE, AND HISTORY OF THE
CATHOLIC CHURCH
EDITED BY
CHARLES G. HERBERMANN, Ph.D., LL.D.
EDWARD A. PACE, Ph.D., D.D. CONDE B PALLEN, Ph.D., LL.D.
THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D.D. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J.
ASSISTED BY NUMEROUS COLLABORATORS
IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES
VOLUME 1
New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY
Imprimatur
JOHN M. FARLEY
ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK
__________________________________________________________________
The Making of the Catholic Encyclopedia (1917)
The need of a Catholic Encyclopedia in English was manifest for many
years before it was decided to publish one. Editors of various general
Encyclopedias had attempted to make them satisfactory from a Catholic
point of view, but without success, partly because they could not
afford the space, but chiefly because in matters of dispute their
contributors were too often permitted to be partial, if not erroneous,
in their statements.
This need was felt more acutely when, at the beginning of this century,
new editions of several of these general Encyclopedias appeared, in
which many subjects of special interest to Catholics were either
ignored entirely or else scantily and even erroneously treated. For two
years the publishers of some of these Encyclopedias made earnest
efforts to amend the articles which provoked Catholic criticism, but
their efforts served only to emphasize the need of a Catholic
Encyclopedia. Actual work on the Encyclopedia was begun in January,
1905. It was completed in April, 1914. For two years before the
formation of a Board of Editors those who were to be its editors and
publishers met together occasionally to confer about its publication.
These meetings resulted in an agreement among the editors on December
8, 1904, to begin the work early the next year and in the choice of
those who were to be its publishers.
The Board of Editors, five in number, was organized in January, 1905,
and its membership remained the same throughout the production of the
work. All the members had been engaged in editorial work before the
Encyclopedia was thought of. As teachers and lecturers they had become
familiar with the field of education and with the needs of Catholic
literature. Through experience gained in different spheres of activity
they had reached the same conclusions regarding the necessity of a
Catholic Encyclopedia and the advisability of proceeding at once with
its publication.
The editors were elected also as members of the Board of Directors of
the publishing company which was incorporated in February, 1905, and
they were given full authority in all matters affecting the nature,
contents and policy of the Encyclopedia. On February 25 they signed a
contract to produce The Catholic Encyclopedia. Two years were spent in
studying every phase of the project, in arranging its details and in
selecting the requisite methods for carrying on the work carefully and
expeditiously. While a systematic procedure was thus determined upon,
it by no means precluded later discussion of ways and means; the system
itself required that each step should be seriously considered, and for
this purpose the regular meetings of the Board were continued during
the entire course of publication.
On January 11, 1905, Charles G. Herbermann, Professor of Latin and
Librarian of the College of the City of New York, Edward A. Pace, then
Professor of Philosophy in the Catholic University, Conde B. Pallen,
Editor, Rt. Rev. Thomas J. Shahan, then Professor of Church History in
the Catholic University, and John J. Wynne, S.J., Editor of The
Messenger, held their first editorial meeting at the office of The
Messenger, in West Sixteenth Street, New York. Between that date and
April 19, 1913, they held 134 formal meetings to consider the plan,
scope and progress of the work, besides having frequent informal
conferences and constant intercommunication by letter.
Until February, when offices were opened at 1 Union Square, meetings
were held in The Messenger, or at the house of Dr. Herbermann, then on
West Twenty-fifth Street. For two years the days for meetings were the
first and third Saturdays of the month; after that a meeting was held
on the second Saturday only. In the beginning every editor attended
each meeting; after April, 1907, only one of the editors from the
Catholic University was expected to be present.
At the meetings a report was made by each editor of the work he had
done since the last meeting, chiefly in selecting topics; assigning
space for each; choosing contributors and specifying the time allowed
them for each article. These reports were acted upon; criticisms of the
work were considered; the progress of each volume carefully noted, and
various problems solved especially about cross-references, repetitions,
bibliography, illustrations, maps, and the delays and disappointments
which are inevitable in a work depending upon the co-operation of over
1500 persons.
In order to make clear what manner of work they were to publish, the
editors issued, in February, 1906, a pamphlet containing specimen pages
of text and illustrations. This specimen left no room for doubt about
the character of the Encyclopedia. It indicated in general terms the
scope, aim and chief characteristics of the Encyclopedia, as follows:
The Catholic Encyclopedia, as its name implies, proposes to give its
readers full and authoritative information on the entire cycle of
Catholic interests, action and doctrine. What the Church teaches and
has taught; what she has done and is still doing for the highest
welfare of mankind; her methods, past and present; her struggles,
her triumphs, and the achievements of her members, not only for her
own immediate benefit, but for the broadening and deepening of all
true science, literature and art -- all come within the scope of The
Catholic Encyclopedia.
It differs from the general Encyclopedia in omitting facts and
information which have no relation to the Church. On the other hand,
it is not exclusively a church Encyclopedia, nor is it limited to
the ecclesiastical sciences and the doings of churchmen. It records
all that Catholics have done, not only in behalf of charity and
morals, but also for the intellectual and artistic development of
mankind. It chronicles what Catholic artists, educators, poets,
scientists and men of action have achieved in their several
provinces. In this respect it differs from most other Catholic
Encyclopedias. The editors are fully aware that there is no
specifically Catholic science, that mathematics, chemistry,
physiology and other branches of human knowledge are neither
Catholic, Jewish, nor Protestant; but, when it is commonly asserted
that Catholic principles are an obstacle to scientific research, it
seems not only proper but needful to register what and how much
Catholics have contributed to every department of knowledge.
No one who is interested in human history, past and present, can
ignore the Catholic Church, either as an institution which has been
the central figure in the civilized world for nearly two thousand
years, decisively affecting its destinies, religious, literary,
scientific, social and political, or as an existing power whose
influence and activity extend to every part of the globe. In the
past century the Church has grown both extensively and intensively
among English-speaking peoples. Their living interests demand that
they should have the means of informing themselves about this vast
institution, which, whether they are Catholics or not, affects their
fortunes and their destiny.
As for Catholics, their duty as members of the Church impels them to
learn more and more fully its principles; while among Protestants
the desire for a more intimate and accurate knowledge of things
Catholic increases in proportion to the growth of the Church in
numbers and in importance. The Catholic clergy are naturally
expected to direct inquirers to sources of the needed information;
yet they find only too often that the proper answers to the
questions proposed are not to be met with in English literature.
Even the writings of the best intentioned authors are at times
disfigured by serious errors on Catholic subjects, which are for the
most part due, not to ill-will, but to lack of knowledge. It would
be fatuous to hope to call into immediate existence a Catholic
English literature adequate to supply this knowledge and correct
errors. The Encyclopedia, therefore, is the most convenient means of
doing both, enabling, as it does, the foremost Catholic scholars in
every part of the world to contribute articles in the condensed form
that appeals to the man of action, and with the accuracy that
satisfies the scholar.
Designed to present its readers with the full body of Catholic
teaching, the Encyclopedia contains not only precise statements of
what the Church has defined, but also an impartial record of
different views of acknowledged authority on all disputed questions,
national, political or factional. In the determination of the truth
the most recent and acknowledged scientific methods are employed,
and the results of the latest research in theology, philosophy,
history, apologetics, archaeology, and other sciences are given
careful consideration.
The work is entirely new, and not merely a translation or a
compilation from other encyclopedic sources. The editors have
insisted that the articles should contain the latest and most
accurate information to be obtained from the standard works on each
subject. Contributors have been chosen for their special knowledge
and skill in presenting the subject, and they assume the
responsibility for what they have written. Representing as they do
Catholic scholarship in every part of the world, they give the work
an international character.
The Encyclopedia bears the imprimatur of the Most Reverend
Archbishop under whose jurisdiction it is published. In constituting
the editors the ecclesiastical censors, he has given them a singular
proof of his confidence and of his desire to facilitate the
publication of the work which he has promoted most effectively by
his influence and kindly cooperation."
In the execution of the plan thus outlined no essential feature has
been changed or omitted; the Preface would be as appropriate to the
fifteenth volume as it was to the first. Since it was written
innumerable questions arose regarding matters of detail; but these were
settled in accordance with the ideas and principles which were adopted
by the editors before a page of the Encyclopedia was published.
In accomplishing their preliminary task and in dealing with problems
that presented no slight difficulty, the editors were encouraged by the
widespread interest which the first announcement of the Encyclopedia
aroused. Cordial approval and assistance was given by the Apostolic
Delegate and by the members of the Hierarchy, particularly by his
Eminence Cardinal Farley, to whom the project was formally submitted on
January 27, 1905. Many useful suggestions were received from clergymen,
teachers, authors, and publishers in the United States and in other
countries. The project was welcomed with enthusiasm by the laity, and a
large number of subscriptions were taken before the first volume
appeared in March, 1907. As other volumes followed with promptness and
regularity, the public soon became aware that the Encyclopedia was
rapidly passing from the region of things possible and desirable to
that of accomplished facts, and moreover that it was taking a unique
position among the important publications of modern times.
The Encyclopedia was to be "an international work of reference on the
constitution, doctrine, discipline and history of the Catholic Church."
With a scope so vast before them, the editors devoted their earliest
efforts to the mapping out of the subject matter. This was arranged in
thirty-two departments which were then distributed so as to allow each
editor a certain group of departments for special supervision and yet
leave to the Board as a whole the final decision upon the inclusion or
exclusion of any proposed subject.
In each department, the selection of subjects was determined to a
considerable extent by the very nature and purpose of the Encyclopedia.
Other titles were drawn from various sources -- such as Encyclopedias
of a general character, standard works, and periodical publications. A
large number of articles were suggested by scholars whose competence in
special lines or in the preparation of works similar to the
Encyclopedia gave weight to their opinions. No subject, however, was
accepted or rejected until it had been passed on by each editor.
The work was intended to show not only the inner life of the Church in
organization, teaching, and practice, but also the manifold and
far-reaching influence of Catholicism upon all that most deeply
concerns mankind. Hence the introduction of many titles which are not
specifically Catholic or even religious in the stricter sense, but
under which some interest of the Church or some phase of its activity
is recorded. Such are the accounts given of different religions and
sects, of countries and states, of literatures and philosophies, of
institutions and individuals that have been extraneous, or even
antagonistic, to the Church. Special care, of course, was taken to
include those subjects which are often treated in a way that gives
false or inaccurate impressions regarding the Catholic position or the
facts of history. Even where the same subject would naturally recur
under different titles, it was, if sufficiently important, allotted a
separate article. On the other hand, to avoid needless repetition, it
was often found necessary to introduce the subject in alphabetical
order with a cross-reference to the article in which, under a different
title, it would be more appropriately treated. Finally, as no other
extensive work of reference would be available to a large number of the
purchasers of the Encyclopedia, due provision was made for supplying in
every instance such general information as the ordinary reader might
reasonably expect to find in connection with the subjects treated.
As the vitality of an organization is manifested chiefly in the
achievements of its prominent members, it is but natural that this work
should contain a large number of biographies. In these articles,
particularly judicious selection was necessary, as well as moderation
in treatment. For obvious reasons biographies of living persons were
not admitted; nor was distinction of whatever sort the chief criterion
of selection, but rather, in the case of eminent Catholics, their
loyalty to the Church. On grounds that are plainly different, the list
of biographies includes various names that recall important
controversies, heresies, errors or phases of conflict through which the
Church has passed, and concerning which it was needful to set in clear
light the Catholic position.
From the outset the editors adopted the principle that each article
should be prepared by the ablest available writer. The character of the
work was such that it could not be done, as much encyclopedia writing
is done, by a staff of office assistants. The contributors were
selected, not on account of their official position, but with reference
to their scholarship and their special qualifications for handling the
subjects assigned them. In addition to the names already conspicuous in
Catholic literature, the list was drawn up after consultation with
well-informed persons in various countries. Inquiries were sent to the
Catholic colleges, seminaries and universities in the United States,
Canada, England, Ireland, Scotland and Australia. The Bishops in the
English-speaking countries were requested to suggest writers for
articles on their respective dioceses and the political divisions, such
as the States of the Union, in which their dioceses are situated. The
heads of religious orders and congregations were consulted regarding
the assignment of each article in which they might be directly
interested. Authorities on Catholic subjects in the non-Catholic
institutions of learning in this country were also invited to
cooperate. By correspondence or by personal visits, the editors secured
contributions from prominent writers on the Continent of Europe,
especially among the professors of the various universities and members
of learned societies. The fact that the list includes 1452 names,
representing 43 countries, sufficiently attests the international
character of the Encyclopedia. Furthermore, it can be said without
exaggeration that no other work has ever been produced by the joint
labours of so many Catholic men and women representing the clergy, the
laity, the professions, and the various lines of scientific and
literary activity. The list of contributors to each volume is in itself
an object lesson; it shows in a concrete way the intellectual forces
that the Church has developed and animated with her spirit.
It was not to be expected that every contributor would know by
intuition just how an article should be written to answer the purposes
of the Encyclopedia; nor would it have been possible to secure the
desired uniformity of treatment if each writer had been left entirely
to his own devices. The editors accordingly accompanied the assignment
of articles with directions more or less detailed for their
preparation. Certain classes of subjects, e.g. biographies, states,
dioceses, were carefully outlined so that the writer might furnish the
requisite information on all essential points. For the treatment of
other subjects suggestions were offered with a view to having the
articles include whatever might be of actual and practical interest at
the present time. In some instances the contributors themselves
requested more explicit instruction or indicated possible
modifications. The exchange of views on all important matters was
extremely helpful both in furthering the aims of the editors and in
making each writer an active collaborator. Indeed so cordial, and, in
many instances, so intimate were the relations of contributors and
editors, that there was no need of establishing special editorial
committees in certain countries as the editors had originally
contemplated. It also facilitated, to a considerable extent, the
editors' principal task.
In the allotment of space for each article, the editors, who gave to
this point their joint attention, were guided in every instance by the
rule "quod requiritur et sufficit." The length of an article is not
necessarily, therefore, an indication of its importance. This is true
particularly of biographies, in which a line often predicates greater
celebrity than a paragraph. The encyclopedic style admits no waste
word, and though frequently our writers exceeded the space allotted to
them, they rarely, if ever, objected to the condensation of their
articles, regarding it commonly as an improvement.
Every article was submitted to each of the editors for criticism,
acceptance, or rejection. In case of acceptance -- and this fortunately
was the usual verdict -- the article was handed over to the editor in
charge of the department to which it belonged, for revision so far as
this might be needed in order to meet the requirements of the
Encyclopedia regarding space, content, and literary form. Whenever
serious changes were found necessary, these were referred to the
author. All articles of a doctrinal character were submitted to the
censors appointed by ecclesiastical authority. In the case of an
article written in a language other than English, it was translated by
an expert, and the translation was then carefully compared by the
editor with the original manuscript. Frequently brief paragraphs were
added, with the writer's authorization, in order to bring out some
phase or detail of the subject that possessed special importance for
the English-speaking countries. Additions were also made to the
bibliography of works that were more easily accessible to the readers
of the Encyclopedia or that were published after the article had been
received.
Besides providing for the text of the Encyclopedia, the editors
undertook the selection and arrangement of the illustrations, plates,
and maps, which are a prominent feature in each volume. The wide range
of subjects calling for illustration included personages of note,
historic scenes and events, famous edifices, ecclesiastical or secular,
monuments of Christian antiquity, codices, manuscripts, and the
masterpieces of art in painting, sculpture, and architecture. The maps
had to be specially prepared for the Encyclopedia, as they were
designed to show not only the political or territorial divisions, but
also the ecclesiastical conditions, such as the location of each
episcopal or archiepiscopal see.
The editors were aided by a well-trained corps of assistants numbering
in the course of the work 151, through whose hands the edited article
passed on its way to the press. The office staff rendered efficient
service not only by the routine work of preparing copy, but also by
keeping accurate records of assignments, transmissions of manuscripts,
and reports from contributors. It was thus possible at any moment to
ascertain precisely the stage which a given article had reached and the
progress that had been made toward the completion of each volume. The
staff was also charged with numerous matters of detail, such as the
verification of dates and references, comparison of statements in
different articles, and preparation of lists of subjects by way of
suggestion to the Editorial Board.
The Company which was organized to publish The Catholic Encyclopedia
was originally known as the Robert Appleton Company. In 1912 its title
was changed to The Encyclopedia Press, Inc. It has always been an
entirely independent organization, expressly organized for the special
purpose of publishing the Encyclopedia. Until it was completed the
Company, therefore, did not undertake to bring out any other book or to
enter any other field of business. Its members -- all men of prominence
in business and financial circles -- have given their entire time and
the fruits of their long experience to the production of this work.
They have dealt successfully with the diverse problems which such an
enterprise involves on the material and technical sides: printing,
plate-making, advertising, and selling. The whole financial
administration of the Encyclopedia has been conducted on sound business
principles.
From the appearance of the first volume of the Encyclopedia to the
conclusion of the Index Volume, the work met with a cordial reception
everywhere. Reviewers not only spoke of it in terms of unusual praise,
but they also recognized in it at once the powerful influence for good.
Hilaire Belloc, for instance, spoke of it as "one of the most powerful
influences working in favor of the truth." Georges Goyau recommended it
as expressing the genius of Catholicity and spoke of its vast army of
contributors as forming a modern intellectual crusade. The Dublin
Review pronounced it the "greatest triumph of Christian science in the
English tongue." The Protestant Press commented most favorably on the
scholarliness and fairness of the articles, one weekly recommending it
as the "greatest work undertaken for the advancement of Christian
knowledge since the days of Trent." According to the Saturday Review,
London, it was a "model of reference works." According to the
Athenoeum, it was a "thorough and learned enterprise." Churchmen, men
of affairs, journalists, educators, librarians and editors all vied
with one another in praising the scholarship of the Encyclopedia.
Article courtesy the Jacques Maritain Center
__________________________________________________________________
To the Knights of Columbus and Their Friends
In taking under our auspices a special edition of The Catholic
Encyclopedia, we are actuated by the motive which originally inspired
the production of this work.
From the start, as the Preface to Volume I declares, it was determined
that this encyclopedia should not be exclusively a Church publication,
containing only matters of special interest to the clergy. It is
intended for the layman as well as for the priest; and, consequently,
it contains all that he needs to know, treated from his point of view.
The Editor-in-Chief and the Managing Editor are laymen, as were fully
500 of the contributors, and 150 editorial assistants. With them the
clerical editors and contributors have co-operated in full appreciation
of the importance of producing a work which in content and style would
satisfy the scholar in his study and yet interest the man in the
street.
For this Encyclopedia is designed to be the starting-point of a
movement among Catholics, a great educational movement in every
Catholic home in the land, the source of a literature that will once
more as in the days before the Reformation employ the English tongue in
the cause of Catholic truth. It is verily an educational and literary
crusade, and as such it must appeal strongly to every member of an
Order whose members, in the words of Archbishop Ireland, "aim to be the
trusted auxiliaries of the Church, her organized chivalry, ever first
and foremost when her call is heard, or her banner leads".
We have but lately completed our achievement of providing for the
Catholic University America the half million dollar scholarship
foundation which is to enable Catholic young men from every part of the
land to take advantage of the educational facilities of that great
institution.
Here is an offer which brings all the advantages that The Catholic
University can at present afford and more right into our own homes. The
Catholic Encyclopedia is a veritable Catholic Home University. It has
been truly styled "a university in print". Few, if any, of our
membership, are in a position to take advantage of the Catholic
University foundation; scarcely one is unable to avail himself of an
offer, which brings to every Catholic home the best the University can
give.
As if divining that the Knights of Columbus would take on themselves
the task of giving the widest possible circulation to The Catholic
Encyclopedia, His Grace, Archbishop Ireland, discoursing on "The
Typical Catholic Layman of America", before the Supreme Council of the
Order lately assembled in St. Paul, recommended the work in the
following eloquent terms:
"An intelligent laity is the prime need of the Church to-day, in
America. The battle is opened. It is a flood of contradiction, of
misrepresentation, of calumnies. History is perverted; Catholic
discipline is travestied. When the Church, as seen daily, cannot with
be assailed, the appeal is to centuries of long ago, more unfamiliar to
the reader -- to remote lands whence no contradiction may come. The
remedy is intelligence of all important matters concerning the Church
at home and abroad, intelligence that Catholics be guarded from
poisonous inoculation, and be, at the same time, in a position to
influence public opinion in favor of truth and justice. The most ready
arm is the press: hence the duty of the hour is to give generous
support to the Catholic newspaper, to read it, to distribute it,
supplementing it, as occasion permits, with magazine and book. One
book, the summary of thousands, I especially recommend, The Catholic
Encyclopedia.
JAMES A. FLAHERTY,
JOSEPH C. PELLETIER,
WILLIAM J. MCGINLEY,
Catholic Truth Committee of the Knights of Columbus.
__________________________________________________________________
Aachen
Aachen
(In French, Aix-la-Chapelle, the name by which the city is
generally known; in Latin Aquae Grani, later Aquisgranum).
The city of Aachen lies in a Prussian valley, surrounded by
wooded heights, on the Wurm, a tributary of the Roer, on its way
to the Meuse. Population, 1 December, 1905, 151,922 (including
the Parish of Forst); Catholics, 139,485; Protestants, 10,552;
Israelites, 1,658; other denominations, 227. [1990 Population:
about 250,000 -- Ed.]
The city owes its origin to its salubrious springs which were
already known in the time of the Romans. There appears to have
been a royal court in Aachen under the Merovingians, but it rose
to greater importance under Charlemagne who chose it as his
favourite place of residence, adorned it with a noble-imperial
palace and chapel, and gave orders that he should be buried
there.
The precious relics obtained by Charlemagne and Otho III for the
imperial chapel were the objects of great pilgrimages in the
Middle Ages (the so-called "Shrine Pilgrimages") which drew
countless swarms of pilgrims from Germany, Austria, Hungary,
England, Sweden, and other countries. From the middle of the
fourteenth century onwards, however it became customary to
expose the four great relics only once in every seven years, a
custom which still holds. These pilgrimages, the coronations of
the German emperors (thirty-seven of whom were crowned there
between 813 and 1531), the flourishing industries and the
privileges conferred by the various emperors combined to make
Aachen one of the first cities of the Empire.
The decay of Aachen dates from the religious strife of the
German Reformation. Albrecht von Muenster first preached
Protestantism there in the year 1524 but was afterwards
forbidden to preach the new views and executed on account of two
murders committed during his stay in the cities of Maastricht
and Wesel. A new Protestant community was soon, however formed
in Aachen, which gradually attained such strength as to provoke
a rising in 1581, force the election of a Protestant
burgomaster, and defy the Emperor for several years. The Ban of
the empire was, therefore, pronounced against the city in 1597
and put in force by the Duke of Julich, the Catholic overlord of
the city. The Catholics were restored to their rights, and the
Jesuits invited to Aachen, in 1600. In 1611, however, the
Protestants rose afresh, plundered the Jesuit college, drove out
the Catholic officials in 1612, and opened their gates to troops
from Brandenburg. The Ban of the Empire was again laid on the
city, and executed by the Spanish general, Spinola. The
Protestant ringleaders were tried or exiled, and many other
Protestants banished. These troubles, together with a great fire
which destroyed 4,000 houses, put an end to the prosperity of
the city.
Two treaties of peace were concluded at Aachen during the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. By the first, dated 2 May
1668, Louis XIV was compelled, by the Triple Aliiance between
England, the Netherlands, and Sweden, to abandon the war against
the Spanish Netherlands, to restore the Franche Comte, which he
had conquered, and to content himself with twelve Flemish
fortresses. The second treaty, dated 18 October, 1748, put an
end to the War of the Austrian Succession. In 1793 and 1794,
Aachen was occupied by the French, incorporated with the French
Republic in 1798 and 1802, and made the capital of the
Department of the Roer. By the terms of the French Concordat of
1801 Aachen was made a bishopric subject to the Archbishop of
Mechlin, and composed of 79 first class, and 754 second class,
parishes. The first and only bishop was Marcus Antonius Berdolet
(b. 13 September, 1740, at Rougemont, in Alsace 3; d. 13 August,
1809), who, for the most part, left the government of his
diocese to his vicar-general, Martin Wilhelm Fonck (b. 28
October, 1752, at Goch; d. 26 June, 1830, as Provost of Cologne
Cathedral). After the death of Bishop Berdolet the diocese was
governed by Le Camus, Vicar General of Meaux; after his death,
in 1814, by the two vicars-general Fonck and Klinkenberg. The
Bull of Pius VII, "De Salute Animarum," dated 16 July, 1821
which regulated church matters in Prussia anew, did away with
the bishopric of Aachen, and transferred most of its territory
to the archdiocese of Cologne; a collegiate chapter, consisting
of a provost and six canons, taking the place of the bishopric
in 1825. In 1815 Aachen became Prussian territory. The Congress
of Aix-la-Chapelle sat there from 30 September to 11 November,
1818, and was attended by the sovereigns of Russia, Austria, and
Prussia, and by plenipotentiaries from France and England, to
determine the relations between France and the Powers. France
obtained a reduction of the war indemnity and the early
departure of the army of occupation, and joined the Holy
Alliance; the other four Powers guaranteed the throne of France
to the Bourbons, against any revolution that might occur.
Aachen, under Prussian government, returned to prosperity,
chiefly through the development of the coal mines in the
neighborhood, which facilitated several extensive industries
(such as the manufacture of linen, needles, machinery, glass,
woolen, and half-woollen stuffs, etc.), but also in consequence
of the large number of visitors to its hot springs.
The minster ranks first among the church buildings; it consists
of three distinct parts: the octagon, the choir, and the crown,
or ring, of chapels, the octagon forming the central portion.
This last is the most important monument of Carolingian
architecture, it was built between 796 and 804, in the reign of
Charlemagne, by Master Odo of Metz, and modelled after the
Italian circular church of San Vitale at Ravenna. It was
consecrated by Pope Leo III. It is an eight-angled, domed
building, 54 feet in diameter, with a sixteen-sided
circumference of 120 feet, and a height of 124 feet. The
interior of the dome is adorned with mosaics on a gold ground,
executed by Salviati of Venice, in 1882, representing Our Lord
surrounded by the four and twenty Ancients of the Apocalypse.
The main building was decorated with marble and mosaics in 1902,
after the designs of H. Schaper. Over the spot supposed to be
the site of Charlemagne's grave hangs an enormous corona of
lamps, the gift of the Emperor Frederick I, Barbarossa; in the
choir of the octagon, the so-called upper minster, stands
Charlemagne's throne, made of great-slabs of white marble,
where, after the coronation, the German emperors received the
homage of their nobles. The rich upper choir, built in Gothic
style, joins on to the eastern side of the octagon; it was begun
in the second half of the fourteenth century, and dedicated in
1414. The thirteen windows, each 100 feet high, have been filled
with new coloured glass; on the pillars betwen them stand
fourteen statues (the Mother of God, the Twelve Apostles, and
Charlemagne), dating from the fifteenth century. Among the
treasures of the choir should be mentioned the famous
Gospel-pulpit, enriched with gold plates, the gift of the
Emperor Henry II, the throne canopy of the fifteenth century the
new Gothic high altar of 1876, and the memorial stone which
marks the spot where the Emperor Otto III formerly lay. The
lower portions of the bell-tower, to the west of the octagon,
belong to the Carolingian period, the Gothic superstructure
dates from 1884. Of the chapels which surround the whole
building, the so-called Hungarian chapel contains the minster
treasury, which includes a large number of relics, vessels, and
vestments, the most important being those known as the four
"Great Relics," namely, the cloak of the Blessed Virgin, the
swaddling-clothes of the Infant Jesus, the loin-cloth worn by
Our Lord on the Cross, and the cloth on which lay the head of
St. John the Baptist after his beheading. They are exposed every
seven years and venerated by thousands of pilgrims.
Among the other Catholic churches of Aachen, the following may
be mentioned:
+ the Church of Our Lady, a Gothic church in brick, built by
Friederich Statz in 1859
+ the Church of St. Foillan, the oldest parish church in the
city, which dates, in its present form, from the Gothic
period, and was renovated between 1883 and 1888; and
+ the Romanesque Church of St. James, built between 1877 and
1888.
The most important secular building is the Rathaus, built
between 1333 and 1350, on the site of, and out of the ruins of,
Charlemagne's imperial palace, and completely renovated between
1882 and 1903. The facade is adorned with the statues of
fifty-four German emperors, the great hall ( Kaisersaal) with
eight frescoes from designs by Alfred Rethel.
In Aachen there are foundations established by the Franciscans,
Capuchins, Alexians, and Redemptorists. A number of female
orders also have establishments, including:
+ the Sisters of St. Charles,
+ the Christensians,
+ the Sisters of St. Elizabeth,
+ the Franciscan Sisters,
+ the Sisters of the Good Shepherd,
+ the Sisters of the Poor Child Jesus,
+ the Carmelites,
+ the Ursulines, and
+ the Sisters of St. Vincent.
COUNCILS OF AACHEN
A number of important councils were held here in the early
Middle Ages. In the mixed council of 798, Charlemagne proclaimed
an important capitulary of eighty-one chapters, largely a
repetition of earlier ecclesiastical legislation, that was
accepted by the clergy and acquired canonical authority. At the
council of 799, after a discussion of six days Felix, Bishop of
Urgel, in Spain, avowed himself overcome by Alcuin and withdrew
his heretical theory of Adoptianism. In the synods of 816, 817,
818, and 819, clerical and monastic discipline was the chief
issue, and the famous "Regula Aquensis" was made obligatory on
all establishments of canons and canonesses (see WESTERN
MONASTICISM), while a new revision of the Rule of St. Benedict
was imposed on the monks of that order by the reformer Benedict
of Aniane. The synod of 836 was largely attended and devoted
itself to the restoration of ecclesiastical discipline that had
been gravely affected by the civil wars between Louis the Pious
and his sons. From 860 to 862 three councils were occupied with
the question of the divorce of King Lothaire I from his wife,
Theutberga. In 1166 took place the famous schismatic council,
approved by the Antipope Paschal III, in which was decreed the
canonization of Charlemagne, that was solemnly celebrated 29
December of that year.
JOSEPH LINS
Aaron
Aaron
Brother of Moses, and High Priest of the Old Law.
I. LIFE
Altogether different views are taken of Aaron's life, according
as the Pentateuch, which is the main source on the subject, is
regarded as one continuous work, composed by Moses or under his
supervision--hence most trustworthy in the narration of
contemporary events--or as a compilation of several documents of
divers origins and dates, strung together, at a late epoch, into
the present form. The former conception, supported by the
decisions of the Biblical Commission, is held by Catholics at
large; many independent critics adopt the latter. We shall study
this part of the subject under this twofold aspect, although
dwelling longer, as is meet, on the former.
(a) Traditional Catholic Standpoint
According to I Paral., vi, 1-3, Aaron (the signification of
whose name is unknown) was the great-grandson of Levi, and the
second of the children of Amram and Jochabed, Mary being the
eldest and Moses the youngest. From Ex., vii, 7, we learn that
Aaron was born eighty-three, and Moses eighty years, before the
Exodus. It may be admitted, however, that this pedigree is
probably incomplete, and the age given perhaps incorrect. We
know nothing of Aaron's life prior to his calling. The first
mention of his name occurs when Moses, during the vision on
Mount Horeb, was endeavouring to decline the perilous mission
imposed upon him, on the plea that he was slow of speech and
lacking in eloquence. Yahweh answered his objection, saying that
Aaron the Levite, who was endowed with eloquence, would be his
spokesman. About the same time Aaron also was called from on
high. He then went to meet Moses, in order to be instructed by
him in the designs of God; then they assembled the ancients of
the people, and Aaron, who worked miracles to enforce the words
of his divine mission, announced to them the good tidings of the
coming freedom (Ex., iv). To deliver God's message to the King
was a far more laborious task. Pharao harshly rebuked Moses and
Aaron, whose interference proved disastrous to the Israelites
(Ex., v). These latter, overburdened with the hard work to which
they were subjected, bitterly murmured against their leaders.
Moses in turn complained before God, who replied by confirming
his mission and that of his brother. Encouraged by this fresh
assurance of Yahweh's help, Moses and Aaron again appeared
before the King at Tanis (Ps. lxxvii, 12), there to break the
stubbornness of Pharao's will by working the wonders known as
the ten plagues. In these, according to the sacred narrative,
the part taken by Aaron was most prominent. Of the ten plagues,
the first three and the sixth were produced at his command; both
he and his brother were each time summoned before the King, both
likewise received from God the last instructions for the
departure of the people, to both was, in later times, attributed
Israel's deliverance from the land of bondage; both finally
repeatedly became the target for the complaints and reproaches
of the impatient and inconsistent Israelites.
When the Hebrews reached the desert of Sin, tired by their long
march, fearful at the thought of the coming scarcity of food,
and perhaps weakened already by privations, they began to regret
the abundance of the days of their sojourn in Egypt, and
murmured against Moses and Aaron. But the two leaders were soon
sent by God to appease their murmuring by the promise of a
double sign of the providence and care of God for His people.
Quails came up that same evening, and the next morning the
manna, the new heavenly bread with which God was to feed His
people in the wilderness, lay for the first time round the camp.
Aaron was commanded to keep a gomor of manna and put it in the
tabernacle in memory of this wonderful event. This is the first
circumstance in which we hear of Aaron in reference to the
tabernacle and the sacred functions (Ex., xvi). At Raphidim, the
third station after the desert of Sin, Israel met the Amalecites
and fought against them. While the men chosen by Moses battled
in the plain, Aaron and Hur were with Moses on the top of a
neighbouring hill, whither the latter had betaken himself to
pray, and when he "lifted up his hands, Israel overcame: but if
he let therm down a little, Amalec overcame. And Moses' hands
were heavy: so they took a stone, and put under him and he sat
on it: and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands on both sides"
until Amalec was put to flight (Ex., xvii). In the valley of
Mount Sinai the Hebrews received the Ten Commandments; then
Aaron, in company with seventy of the ancients of Israel, went
upon the mountain, to be favoured by a vision of the Almighty,
"and they saw the God of Israel: and under his feet as it were a
work of sapphire stone, and as the heaven when clear." Thereupon
Moses, having entrusted to Aaron and Hur the charge of settling
the difficulties which might arise, went up to the top of the
mountain.
His long delay finally excited in the minds of the Israelites
the fear that he had perished. They gathered around Aaron and
requested him to make them a visible God that might go before
them. Aaron said: "Take the golden earrings from the ears of
your wives, and your sons and daughters, and bring them to me."
When he had received them, he made of them a molten calf before
which he built up an altar, and the children of Israel were
convoked to celebrate their new god. What was Aaron's intention
in setting up the golden calf ? Whether he and the people meant
a formal idolatry, or rather wished to raise up a visible image
of Yahweh their deliverer, has been the subject of many
discussions; the texts, however, seem to favour the latter
opinion (cf. Ex., xxxii, 4). Be this as it may, Moses, at God's
command, came down from the mountain in the midst of the
celebration -- at the sight of the apparent idolatry, filled
with a holy anger, he broke the Tables of the Law, took hold of
the idol, burnt it and beat it to powder, which he strowed into
the water. Then, addressing his brother as the real and
answerable author of the evil: " What," said he, "has this
people done to thee, that thou shouldst bring upon them a most
heinous sin?" (Ex., xxxii 21). To this so well deserved
reproach, Aaron made only an embarrassed answer, and he would
undoubtedly have undergone the chastisement for his crime with
the three thousand men (so with the best textual authority,
although the Vulgate reads three and twenty thousand) that were
slain by the Levites at Moses' command (Ex., xxxii, 28), had not
the latter prayed for him and allayed God's wrath (Deut., ix,
20).
In spite of the sin, God did not alter the choice he had made of
Aaron (Hebr., v, 4) to be Israel's first High Priest. When the
moment came, Moses consecrated him, according to the ritual
given in Ex., xxix, for his sublime functions; in like manner
Nadab, Abiu, Eleazar, and Ithamar, Aaron's sons he devoted to
the divine service. What the high priesthood was, and by what
rites it was conferred we shall see later. The very day of
Aaron's consecration, God, by an awful example, indicated with
what perfection sacred functions ought to be performed. At the
incense-offering, Nadab and Abiu put strange fire into the
censers and offered it up before the Lord, whereupon a flame,
coming out from the Lord, forthwith struck them to death, and
they were taken away from before the sanctuary vested with their
priestly garments and cast forth out of the camp. Aaron whose
heart had been filled with awe and sorrow at this dreadful
scene, neglected also an important ceremony; but his excuse
fully satisfied Moses and very likely God Himself, for no
further chastisement punished his forgetfulness (Lev., x, Num.,
iii, 4, xxvi, 61).
In Lev., xvi, we see him perform the rites of the Day of
Atonement -- in like manner, to him were transmitted the
precepts concerning the sacrifices and sacrificers (Lev., xvii,
xxi, xxii). A few months later, when the Hebrews reached
Haseroth, the second station after Mount Sinai, Aaron fell into
a new fault. He and Mary "spoke against Moses, because of his
wife the Ethiopian. And they said: Hath the Lord spoken by Moses
only? " (Num., xii). From the entire passage, especially from
the fact that Mary alone was punished, it has been surmised that
Aaron's sin was possibly a mere approval of his sister's
remarks; perhaps also he imagined that his elevation to the high
priesthood should have freed him from all dependence upon his
brother. However the case may be, both were summoned by God
before the tabernacle, there to hear a severe rebuke. Mary,
besides, was covered with leprosy; but Aaron, in the name of
both, made amends to Moses, who in turn besought God to heal
Mary. Moses' dignity had been, to a certain extent, disowned by
Aaron. The latter's prerogatives likewise excited the jealousy
of some of the sons of Ruben; they roused even the envy of the
other Levites. The opponents, about two hundred and fifty in
number, found their leaders in Core, a cousin of Moses and of
Aaron, Dathan, Abiron, and Hon, of the tribe of Ruben. The
terrible punishment of the rebels and of their chiefs, which had
at first filled the multitude with awe, soon roused their anger
and stirred up a spirit of revolt against Moses and Aaron who
sought refuge in the tabernacle. As soon as they entered it "
the glory of the Lord appeared. And the Lord said to Moses: Get
you out from the midst of this multitude, this moment will I
destroy them" (Num., xvi, 43-45). And, indeed, a burning fire
raged among the people and killed many of them. Then again,
Aaron, at Moses' order, holding his censer in his hand, stood
between the dead and the living to pray for the people, and the
plague ceased. The authority of the Supreme Pontiff, strongly
confirmed before the people, very probably remained thenceforth
undiscussed. God, nevertheless, wished to give a fresh testimony
of His favour. He commanded Moses to take and lay up in the
tabernacle the rods of the princes of the Twelve Tribes, with
the name of every man written upon his rod. The rod of Levi's
tribe should bear Aaron's name: "whomsoever of these I shall
choose," the Lord had said "his rod shall blossom." The
following day, when they returned to the tabernacle, they "
found that the rod of Aaron . . . was budded: and that the buds
swelling it had bloomed blossoms, which, spreading the leaves
were formed into almonds." All the Israelites, seeing this,
understood that Yahweh's choice was upon Aaron, whose rod was
brought back into the tabernacle as an everlasting testimony. Of
the next thirty-seven years of Aaron's life, the Bible gives no
detail; its narrative is concerned only with the first three and
the last years of the wandering life of the Hebrews in the
desert, but from the events above described, we may conclude
that the life of the new pontiff was passed unmolested in the
performance of his sacerdotal functions.
In the first month of the thirty-ninth year after the Exodus,
the Hebrews camped at Cades, where Mary, Aaron's sister, died
and was buried. There the people were in want of water and soon
murmured against Moses and Aaron. Then God said to Moses: "Take
the rod, and assemble the people together thou and Aaron thy
brother, and speak to the rock before them, and it shall yield
waters" (Num., xx, 8). Moses obeyed and struck the rock twice
with the rod, so that there came forth water in great abundance.
We learn from Ps. cv, 33, that Moses in this circumstance was
inconsiderate in his words, perhaps when he expressed a doubt as
to whether he and Aaron could bring forth water out of the rock.
Anyway God showed himself greatly displeased at the two brothers
and declared that they would not bring the people into the Land
of Promise. This divine word received, four months later, its
fulfilment in Aaron's case. When the Hebrews reached Mount Hor,
on the borders of Edom, God announced to Moses that his
brother's last day had come, and commanded him to bring him up
on the mountain. In sight of all the people, Moses went up with
Aaron and Eleazar. Then he stripped Aaron of all the priestly
garments wherewith he vested Eleazar, and Aaron died. Moses then
came down with Eleazar and all the multitude mourned for Aaron
thirty days. Mussulmans honour on Djebel Nabi-Haroun a monument
they call Aaron's tomb, the authenticity of this sepulchre,
however, is not altogether certain. By his marriage with
Elizabeth Nahason's sister four sons were born to Aaron. The
first two, Nadab and Abiu, died without leaving posterity, but
the descendants of the two others, Eleazar and Ithamar, became
very numerous. None of them, however, honoured Aaron's blood as
much as John the Baptist, who besides being the Precursor of the
Messias, was proclaimed by the Word made Flesh "the greatest
among them that are born of women" (Matt., xi, 11).
(b) Independent Standpoint
Aaron's history takes on an entirely different aspect when the
various sources of the Pentateuch are distinguished and dated
after the manner commonly adopted by independent critics. As a
rule it may be stated that originally the early Judean narrative
(J) did not mention Aaronif his name now appears here and there
in the parts attributed to that source, it is most likely owing
to an addition by a late redactor. There are two documents,
principally, that speak of Aaron. In the old prophetic
traditions circulating among the Ephraimites (E) Aaron figured
as a brother and helper of Moses. He moves in the shadow of the
latter, in a secondary position, as, for instance, during the
battle against Amalec; with Hur, he held up his brother's hands
until the enemy was utterly defeated. To Aaron, in some
passages, the supreme authority seems to have been entrusted, in
the absence of the great leader, as when the latter was up on
Mount Sinai; but his administration proved weak, since he so
unfortunately yielded to the idolatrous tendencies of the
people. According to the document in question, Aaron is neither
the pontiff nor the minister of prayer. It is Moses who raises
his voice to God at the tabernacle (Ex., xxxiii, 7-10), and we
might perhaps understand from the same place (v. 11) that Josue,
not Aaron, ministers in the tent of meeting; in like manner,
Josue, not Aaron, goes up with Moses on Mount Sinai, to receive
the stone Tables of the Law (Ex., xxiv, 13).
In the Priestly narratives (P) Aaron, on the contrary, occupies
a most prominent place -- there we learn, indeed, with Aaron's
pedigree and age, almost all the above-narrated particulars, all
honourable for Moses' brother, such, for instance, as the part
played by Aaron in the plagues, his role in some memorable
events of the desert life, as the fall of the manna, the
striking of water from the rock, the confirmation of the
prerogatives of his priesthood against the pretensions of Core
and the others, and, finally, the somewhat mysterious relation
of his death, as it is found in Num., xx. From this analysis of
the sources of his history Aaron's great personality has
undoubtedly come out belittled, chiefly because of the
reputation of the writer of the Priestly narrative; critics
charge him with caste prejudices and an unconcealed desire of
extolling whatever has reference to the sacerdotal order and
functions, which too often drove him to exaggerations, upon
which history can hardly rely, and even to forgeries.
II. PRIESTHOOD
Whatever opinion they adopt with regard to the historical value
of all the traditions concerning Aaron's life, all scholars,
whether Catholics or independent critics, admit that in Aaron's
High Priesthood the sacred writer intended to describe a model,
the prototype, so to say, of the Jewish High Priest. God, on
Mount Sinai, instituting a worship, did also institute an order
of priests. According to the patriarchal customs, the first born
son in every family used to perform the functions connected with
God's worship. It might have been expected, consequently, that
Ruben's family would be chosen by God for the ministry of the
new altar. According to the biblical narrative, it was Aaron,
however, who was the object of Yahweh's choice. To what
jealousies this gave rise later, has been indicated above. The
office of the Aaronites was at first merely to take care of the
lamp that should ever burn before the veil of the tabernacle
(Ex., xxvii, 21). A more formal calling soon followed (xxviii,
1). Aaron and his sons, distinguished from the common people by
their sacred functions, were likewise to receive holy vestments
suitable to their office. When the moment had come, when the
tabernacle, and all its appurtenances, and whatever was required
for Yahweh's worship were ready Moses, priest and mediator
(Gal., iii, 19), offered the different sacrifices and performed
the many ceremonies of the consecration of the new priests,
according to the divine instructions (Ex., xxix), and repeated
these rites for seven days, during which Aaron and his sons were
entirely separated from the rest of the people. When, on the
eighth day, the High Priest had inaugurated his office of
sacrificer by killing the victims. he blessed the people, very
likely according to the prescriptions of Num., vi, 24-26, and,
with Moses, entered into the tabernacle so as to take possession
thereof. As they " came forth and blessed the people. And the
glory of the Lord appeared to all the multitude: And behold a
fire, coming forth from the Lord, devoured the holocaust, and
the fat that was upon the altar: which when the multitude saw,
they praised the Lord. falling on their faces" (Lev . ix. 23. 24
s So was the institution of the Aaronic priesthood inaugurated
and solemnly ratified by God.
According to Wellhausen's just remarks, Aaron's position in the
Law with regard to the rest of the priestly order is not merely
superior, but unique His sons and the Levites act under his
superintendence (Num., iii, 4), he alone is the one fully
qualified priest; he alone bears the Urim and Thummin and the
Ephod -- he alone is allowed to enter the Holy of Holies, there
to offer incense (Lev., xxiii, 27) once a year on the great Day
of Atonement. In virtue of his spiritual dignity as the head of
the priesthood he is likewise the supreme judge and head of the
theocracy (Num., xxvii, 21- Deut., xvii). He alone is the
answerable mediator between the whole nation and God, for this
cause he bears the names of the Twelve Tribes written on his
breast and shoulders; his trespasses involve the whole people in
guilt, and are atoned for as those of the whole people, while
the princes, when their sin offerings are compared with his,
appear as mere private persons (Lev., iv, 3, 13, 22, ix, 7, xvi,
6). His death makes an epoch; it is when the High Priest, not
the King, dies, that the fugitive slayer obtains his amnesty
(Num., xxxv, 28). At his investiture he receives the chrism like
a king and is called accordingly the anointed priest, he is
adorned with a diadem and tiara like a king (Ex., xxviii), and
like a king, too, he wears the purple, except when he goes into
the Holy of Holies (Lev., xvi,4).
Aaron, first High Priest of the Old Law, is most naturally a
figure of Jesus Christ, first and sole Sovereign Priest of the
New Dispensation. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews was
the first to set off the features of this parallel, indicating
especially two points of comparison. First, the calling of both
Xigh Priests: "Neither doth any man take the honour to himself,
but he that is called by God as Aaron was. So Christ also did
not glorify himself, that he might be made a high priest, but he
that said unto him: Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten
thee" (Heb., v, 4, 5). In the second place, the efficacy and
duration of both the one and the other priesthood. Aaron's
priesthood is from this viewpoint inferior to that of Jesus
Christ. If indeed, the former had been able to perfect men and
communicate to them the justice that pleases God, another would
have been useless. Hence its inefficacy called for a new one,
and Jesus' priesthood has forever taken the place of that of
Aaron (Heb., vii, 11-12)
CHAS. L. SOUVAY
Abaddon
Abaddon
A Hebrew word signifying:
+ ruin, destruction (Job 31:12);
+ place of destruction; the Abyss, realm of the dead (Job 26:6;
Proverbs 15:11);
+ it occurs personified (Apocalypse 9:11) as Abaddon and is
rendered in Greek by Apollyon, denoting the angel-prince of
hell, the minister of death and author of havoc on earth. The
Vulgate renders the Greek Apollyon by the Latin Exterminans
(that is, "Destroyer"). The identity of Abaddon with Asmodeus,
the demon of impurity, has been asserted, but not proved.
In Job 26:6, and Proverbs 15:11, the word occurs in conjunction
with Sheol.
A.J. MAAS
Abandonment
Abandonment
(More properly, Self-Abandonment)
A term used by writers of ascetical and mystical books to
signify the first stage of the union of the soul with God by
conforming to His Will. It is described as the first step in the
unitive or perfect way of approaching God by contemplation, of
which it is the prelude. It implies the passive purification
through which one passes by accepting trials and sufferings
permitted by God to turn souls to Him. It implies also the
desolation which comes upon the soul when relinquishing what it
prizes inordinately in creatures, the surrender of natural
consolations in order to seek God, and the loss for a time of
the consciousness of strong and ardent impulses of the virtues
of Faith, Hope, and Charity; and finally aridity or a lack of
fervent devotion in prayer and in other spiritual actions.
According to some, it is equivalent to the "obscure night,"
described by St. John of the Cross, or the darkness of the soul
in a state of purgation, without light, amid many uncertainties,
risks, and dangers. It is also misused to express a quietistic
condition of the soul, which excludes not only all personal
effort, but even desires, and disposes one to accept evil with
the fatalistic motive that it cannot be helped.
JOHN J. WYNNE
Pedro Abarca
Pedro Abarca
Theologian, born in Aragon in 1619; died 1 October, 1693, at
Palencia. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1641, and passed
almost all his religious life as professor of scholastic, moral,
and controversial theology, chiefly in the University of
Salamanca. Though not mentioned by Hurter in the "Nomenclator,"
he has left many theological works, among which are five volumes
in quarto on the Incarnation and the Sacraments; one in quarto
on Grace, and several minor treatises on moral and dogmatic
subjects. He wrote also extensively on points of history, via:
"The Historical Annals of the Kings of Aragon," "The First Kings
of Pampeluna," and has left many manuscripts and one work, which
he withheld, about the Church of del Pilar.
T.J. CAMPBELL
Abarim
Abarim
(Hebrew har ha'abharim, hare ha'abharim; Septuagint to oros to
Abarim, en to peran tou Iordanou, mountain Abarim, mountains of
Abarim).
A mountain range across Jordan, extending from Mount Nebo in the
north, perhaps to the Arabian desert in the south. The Vulgate
(Deuteronomy 32:49) gives its etymological meaning as
"passages." Its northern part was called Phasga, (or Pisgah) and
the highest peak of Phasga was Mount Nebo (Deuteronomy 3:27;
34:1; 32:49; Numbers 23:14; 27:12; 21:20; 32:47). Balaam blessed
Israel the second time from the top of Mount Phasga (Numbers
23:14); from here Moses saw the Land of Promise, and here
Jeremias hid the ark (II Machabees 2:4-5).
A.J. MAAS
Abba
Abba
Abba is the Aramaic word for "father." The word occurs three
times in the New Testament (Mark 14:36; Romans 8:15; Galatians
4:6). In each case it has its Greek translation subjoined to it,
reading abba ho pater in the Greek text; abba, pater in the
Latin Vulgate, and "Abba, Father" in the English version. St.
Paul made use of the double expression in imitation of the early
Christians, who, in their turn, used it in imitation of the
prayer of Christ. Opinions differ as to the reason for the
double expression in our Lord's prayer:
+ Jesus himself used it;
+ St. Peter added the Greek translation in his preaching,
retaining the archaic direct address;
+ the Evangelist added the Greek translation;
+ St. Mark conformed to an existing Christian custom of praying
by way of hysteron proteron.
A.J. MAAS
Antoine d'Abbadie
Antoine d'Abbadie
Astronomer, geodetist, genographer, physician, numismatist,
philologian, born 1810; died March 20, 1897. While still a young
man, he conceived the project of exploring Africa. Having
prepared himself by six years' study, he spent ten years
exploring Ethiopia, and achieved scientific results of the
greatest value. D'Abbadie was a fervent Catholic, and during his
explorations in Ethiopia made every effort to plant there the
Catholic Faith. It was at his suggestion and that of his brother
Arnauld, companion and colabourer of Antoine, that Gregory XVI
sent missionaries to carry on the work. He published in the
"Revue des Questions Scientifiques," the organ of the society, a
work on the abolition of African slavery. He gave his estate,
called Abbadia, in southern France, to the Academy of Sciences
of Paris, to carry on research. His will provided, furthermore,
for the establishment of an observatory at Abbadia, where a
catalogue of 500,000 stars must be made, the work to be confided
to religious andto be completed before 1950. His principal
writings are: "Catalogue raisonne de manuscrits ethiopiens"
(Paris, 1859); "Resume Geodesique des positions determinees en
Ethiopie: (Paris, 1859); "Geodesie d'Ethiopie ou Triangulation
d'une patrie de la haute Ethiopie: (4 vols., Paris,
1860-73);"Observations relatives `a la physique du globe, faites
au Bresil et en Ethiopie" (Paris, 1873); "Dictionnaire de la
langue Amarinna." --II. Abbadie, Arnauld Michel D', geographer,
younger brother of preceding, b. in Dublin, Ireland, 1815; d. 8
November, 1893. In 1837 he accompanied his brother's expedition
to Abyssinia, where he soon acquired considerable influence, and
never failed to employ it in the interest of the Catholic
missions. His most important work is "Douze ans dans la haute
Ethiopie" (Paris, 1868).
THOMAS J. SHAHAN
St. Abban of Magheranoidhe
St. Abban of Magheranoidhe
(Magheranoidhe is also rendered Murneave or Murnevin).
Nephew of St. Ibar, the apostle of Wexford (a predecessor and
contemporary of St. Patrick), flourished 570-620. He was the son
of Cormac, King of Leinster, and he founded numerous churches in
the district of Ui Cennselaigh, almost conterminous with the
present County Wexford and Diocese of Ferns. His principal
monastery was at Magheranoidhe, subsequently known as
"Abbanstown," today, Adamstown; but he also founded an abbey at
Rosmic-treoin, or New Ross, which afterwards became famous as a
scholastic establishment. He died 16 March, 620. (See also ST.
ABBAN OF NEW ROSS.)
W.H. GRATTAN FLOOD
St. Abban of New Ross
St. Abban of New Ross
Also known as St. Ewin, Abhan, or Evin, but whose name has been
locally corrupted as "Stephen," "Neville," and "Nevin," was the
contemporary and namesake of St. Abban of Magheranoidhe.
contemporary. Some writers have confounded him with St. Evin of
Monasterevan, County Kildare. Even Colgan (Followed by Dr.
Lanigan) fell into the error of identifying Rosglas
(Monasterevan) with Ros-mic-treoin (New Ross). St. Evin of
Rosglas, author of the "Tripartite Life of St. Patrick," died 22
December, at his own foundation, afterwards called Monaster Evin
(County Kildare), whereas St. Abban, or Evin of Ros-mic-treoin,
died at Ross, County Wexford.
W.H. GRATTAN FLOOD
St. Abban the Hermit
St. Abban the Hermit
Though he lived in Abingdon (England), he was certainly an
Irishman. He is commemorated on 13 May, though the year of his
death is not definitely known. He was undoubtedly pre-Patrician.
W.H. GRATTAN FLOOD
Abbe
Abbe
A French word meaning primarily and strictly an abbot or
superior of a monastery of men. It came eventually to be
applied, in France, to every man who wears the dress of a
secular ecclesiastic (Littre). This extension of meaning dates
from the time of Francis I (1515-47), who, by consent of the
Holy See, named secular clerics Abbots in commendam (See ABBOT,
under III, Kinds of Abbot). During the following centuries the
name was applied to clerics, often not in sacred Orders, engaged
as professors or tutors, or in some similar capacity in the
houses of the nobility.
JOHN J. A'BECKET
Jean Baptiste Abbeloos
Jean Baptiste Abbeloos
Orientialist, born 15 January, 1836, at Goyck, Belgium; died 25
February, 1906. He was educated in the seminary of Malines,
1849-60. After his ordination to the priesthood, 22 September,
1860, he studied at Louvain and Rome, devoting himself
especially to Syriac language and literature. He received the
degree of Doctor in Theology from the University of Louvain, 15
July, 1867, spent the following winter in London. and on his
return to Belgium was appointed Professor of Holy Scripture in
the seminary of Malines. Failing health obliged him to abandon
the work of teaching, and he became, in 1876, pastor at Duffel.
He was appointed in 1883 vicar-general under Cardinal Dechamps
and help that position until 10 February, 1887, when he was
appointed Rector of the University of Louvain. During his
administration the University grew rapidly in equipment and
organization. Abbeloos, although in the midst of his official
duties, was always the scholar and the man of high ideals, whose
word and example stimulated younger men to earnest work. Modest
and unassuming, he realized nonetheless the significance of his
position as rector of a great Catholic university, and he
exerted his influence in behalf of Church and country so
effectually that his retirement in 1900 occasioned regret both
in the Universtiy and in the whole kingdom. His published work
are: De vita et scriptis S. Jacobi Sarugensis (Louvain, 1867);
Gregorii Barhebraei Chronicon Ecclesiasticum (Paris and Louvain,
1872-77); aacta Santi Maris (Brussels and Leipzig, 1885); Acta
Mar Kardaghi Martyris (Brussels, 1900).
E.A. PACE
Abbess
Abbess
The female superior in spirituals and temporals of a community
of twelve or more nuns. With a few necessary exceptions, the
position of an Abbess in her convent corresponds generally with
that of an Abbot in his monastery. The title was originally the
distinctive appellation of Benedictine superiors, but in the
course of time it came to be a applied also to the conventual
superior in other orders, especially to these of the Second
Order of St. Francis (Poor Clares) and to these of certain
colleges of canonesses.
HISTORICAL ORIGIN
Monastic communities for women had sprung up in the East at a
very early period. After their introduction into Europe, towards
the close of the fourth century, they began to flourish also in
the West, particularly in Gaul, where tradition ascribes the
foundation of many religious houses to St. Martin of Tours.
Cassian the great organizer of monachishm in Gaul, founded a
famous convent at Marseilles, at the beginning of the fifth
century, and from this convent at a later period, St. Caesarius
(d. 542) called his sister Caesaria, and placed her over a
religious house which he was then founding at Arles. St.
Benedict is also said to have founded a community of virgins
consecrated to God, and to have placed it under the direction of
his sister St. Scholastica, but whether or not the great
Patriarch established a nunnery, it is certain that in a short
time he was looked upon as a guide and father to the many
convents already existing. His rule was almost universally
adopted by them, and with it the title Abbess came into general
use to designate the superior of a convent of nuns. Before this
time the title Mater Monasterii, Mater Monacharum, and
Praeposisa were more common. The name Abbess appears for the
first time in a sepulchral inscription of the year 514, found in
1901 on the site of an ancient convent of virgines sacrae which
stood in Rome near the Basilica of St. Agnes extra Muros. The
inscription commemorates the Abbess Serena who presided over
this convent up to the time of her death at the age of
eighty-five years: "Hic requieescit in pace, Serena Abbatissa S.
V. quae vixzit annos P. M. LXXXV."
MODE OF ELECTION
The office of an Abbess is elective, the choice being by the
secret suffrages of the sister. By the common law of the Church,
all the nuns of a community, professed for the choir, and free
from censures, are entitled to vote; but by particular law some
constitutions extend the right of an active voice only to those
who have been professed for a certain number of years. Lay
sister are excluded by the constitutions of most orders, but in
communities where they have the right to vote their privilage is
to be respected. In nonexempt monasteries the election is
presided over by the ordinary of the diocese of his vicar; in
exempt houses, under the immediate jurisdiction of the Holy See,
the Bishop likewish presides, but only as the delegate of the
Pope. In those under the jurisdiction of a regular prelate the
nuns are obliged to inform the diocesan of the day and time of
election, so that if he wish, he or his representative may be
present. The Bishop and the regular prelate preside jointly, but
in no instance have they aa vote, not even a casting vote. And
the Council of Trent prescribes, further, that "he who preside
at the election, whether it be the Bishop or other superior,
shall not enter the enclosure of the monastery, but shall listen
to or receive the vote of each at the grille." (Cone. Trid.,
Sess. XXV, De regular, et monial., Cap. Vii.) The voting must be
strictly secret, and if secrecy be not observed (whether through
ignorance of the law or not), the election is null and void. A
simple majority of votes for one candidate is sufficient for a
valid election, unless the constitutions of an order require
more than the bare majority. The result is to be proclaimed at
once, by announcing the number of votes cast for each nun, so
that in case of a dispute an immediate opportunity may be
afforded for checking the vote. In case no candidate should
receive the require number of votes, the Bishop or the regular
prelate orders a new election, and for the time appoints a
superior. If the community again fails to agree upon any
candidate, the Bishop or other superior can nominate the one
whom he judges to be the most worthy and depute her as Abbess.
The newly appointed Abbess enters upon the duties of her office
immediately after confirmation, which is obtained for non-exempt
convents from the diocesan, and for exempt houses either from
the regular prelate, if they be under his jurisdiction, or from
the Holy See directly. (Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca;
Abbatisa.-Cf. Taunton, The Law of the Church.)
ELIGIBILITY
Touching the age at which a nun becomes eligible for the office,
the discipline of the Church has varied at different times. Pope
Leo I prescribed forty years. St. Gregory the Great insisted
that the Abbesses chosen by the communities should be at least
sixty-women to whom years had given dignity, discretion, and the
power to withstand temptation. He very strongly prohibited the
appointment of young women as Abbesses (Ep. 55 ch. xi). Popes
Innocent IV and Boniface VIII, on the other hand, were both
content with thirty years. According to the present legislation,
which is that of the Council of Trent, no nun "can be elected as
Abbess unless she has completed the fortieth year of her age,
and the eighth year of her religious profession. "But should no
one be found in any convent with these qualifications, one may
be elected out of another convent of the same order. But if the
superior who presides over the election shall deem even this an
inconvenience, there may be chosen, with the convent of the
Bishop or other superior, one from amongst those in the same
convent who are beyond their thirtieth year, and have since
their profession passed at least five of those years in an
upright manner. . . In other particulars, the constitution of
each order or convent shall be observed." (Conc. Trid., Sess,
xxv, De regular. et monial., Cap. vii.) By various decision of
the Sacred Congregation of the Council and of the Sacred
Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, it is forbidden, without a
dispensation from the Holy See, to elect a nun of illegitimate
birth; one not of virginal integrity of body; or one who has had
to undergo a public penance (unless it were only salutary); a
widow; a blind or deaf nun; or one of three sisters alive at the
same time in the same convent. No nun is permitted to vote for
herself. (Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheea; Abbatissa.-Taunton, op,
cit.) Abbesses are generally elected for life. In Italy,
however, and the adjacent islands, by the Bull of Gregory XIII.
"Exposcit debitum" (1 January, 1583), they are elected for three
years only, and then must vacate the office for a period of
three years, during which time they cannot act even as vicars.
RITE OF BENEDIICTION
Abbesses elected for life can be solemnly blessed according to
the rite prescribeed in the Pontificale Romanum. This
benediction (also called ordination or consecration) they must
seek, under pain of deprivation, within a year of their
election, from the Bishop of the diocese. The ceremony, which
take place during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, can be
performed of any day of the week. No mention is made in the
Pontificale of a conferring of the staff, customary in many
places at the installation of an Abbess, but the rite is
prescribed in many monastic rituals, and as a rule the Abbess,
like the Abbot, bears the crosier as a symbol of her office and
of her rank; she has also a right to the ring. The induction of
an Abbess into office early assumed a liturgical character. St.
Redegundis, in one of her letters, speaks of it, and informs us
that Agnes, the Abbess of Sainte-Croix, before entering on her
charge, received the solemn Rite of Benediction from St.
Germain, the Bishop of Paris. Since the time of St. Gregory the
Great, the blessing was reserved to the bishop of the diocese.
At present some Abbesses are privileged to receive it from
certain regular prelates.
AUTHORITY OF ABBESS
An Abbess can exercise supreme domestic authority ( potestas
dominativa) over her monastery and all its dependencies, but as
a female, she is debarred from exercising any power of spiritual
jurisdiction, such as belongs to an abbot. She is empowered
therefore to administer the temporal possessions of the convent;
to issue commands to her nuns "in virtue of holy obedience",
thus binding them in conscience, provided the obedience she
demands be in accordance with the rule and statutes of the
order; and to prescribe and ordain whatever may be necessary for
the maintenance of discipline in the house, or conducive to the
proper observance of the rule, and the preservation of peace and
order in the community. She can also irritate directly, the vows
of her professed sisters, and indirectly, those of the novices,
but she cannot commute those vows, nor dispense from them.
Neither can she dispense her subjects from any regular and
ecclesiastical observances, without the leave of her prelate,
though she can, in particular instance declare that a certain
precept ceases to bind. She cannot publicly bless her nuns, as a
priest or a prelate blesses, but she can bless them in the way
that a mother blesses her children. She is not permitted to
preach, though she may in chapter, exhort her nuns by
conferences. An Abbess has, morever, a certain power of
coercion, which authorizes her to impose punishments of a
lighter nature, in harmony with the provisions of the rule, but
in no instance has she a right to inflict the graver
ecclesiastical penalties, such as censures. By the decree
"Quemadmodum", 17 December, 1890, of Leo XIII, abbesses and
other superiors are absolutely inhibited "from endeavouring,
directly or indirectly, by command, counsel, fear, threats, or
blandishments, to induce their subjects to make to them the
secret manifestations of conscience in whatsoever manner or
under what name soever." The same decree declares that
permission or prohibition as to Holy Communion "belongs solely
to the ordinary or extraordinary confessor, the superiors having
no right whatever to interfere in the matter, save only the case
in which any one of their subjects had given scandal to the
community since. . . her last confession, or had been guilty of
some grievous public fault, and this only until the guilty one
had once more received the Sacrament of Penance." With regard to
the administration of monastic property it must be noted that in
affairs of greater moment an Abbess is always more or less
dependent on the Ordinary, if subject to him, or on the regular
prelate if her abbey is exempt. By the Constitution
"Inscrutabili," 5 February, 1622, of Gregory XV, all Abbesses,
exempt as well as non-exempt, are furthermore obliged to present
an annual statement of their temporalities to the bishop of the
diocese.
In medieval times the Abbesses of the larger and more important
houses were not uncommonly women of great power and distinction,
whose authority and influence rivalled, at times, that of the
most venerate bishops and abbots. In Saxon England, "they had
often the retinue and state of princesses, especially when they
came of royal blood. They treated with kings, bishops, and the
greatest lords on terms of perfect equality;. . . they were
present at all great religious and national solemnities, at the
dedication of churches, and even, like the queens, took part in
the deliberation of the national assemblies, and affixed their
signatures to the charters therein granted." (Montalembert, "The
Monks of the West," Bk. XV.) They appeared also at Church
councils in the midst of the bishops and abbots and priests, as
did the Abbess Hilda at the Synod of Whitby in 664, and the
Abbess Elfleda, who succeeded her, at that of the River Nith in
705. Five Abbesses were present at the Council of Becanfield in
694, where they signed the decrees before the presbyters. At a
later time the Abbess "took titles from churches impropriated to
her house, presented the secular vicars to serve the parochia
churches, and had all the privileges of a landlord over the
temporal estates attached to her abbey. The Abbess of
Shaftesbury, for instance, at one time, found seven knights'
fees for the King's service and held manor courts, Wilton.
Barking, and Nunnaminster, as well as Shaftesbury, 'held of the
king by an entire barony,' and by right of this tenure had, for
a period, the privilge of being summoned to Parliament."
(Gasquet, "English Monastic Life," 39.) In Germany the Abbesses
of Quedimburg, Gandersheim, Lindau, Buchau, Obermuenster, etc.,
all ranked among the independent princes of the Empire, and as
such sat and voted in the Diet as members of the Rhenish bench
of bishops. They lived in princely state with a court of their
own, ruled their extensive conventual estates like temporal
lords, and recognized no ecclesiastic superior except the Pope.
After the Reformation, their Protestant successors continued to
enjoy the same imperial privileges up to comparatively recent
times. In France, Italy, and Spain, the female superiors of the
great monastic houses were likewise very powerful. But the
external splendour and glory of medieval days have now departed
from all.
CONFESSION TO THE ABBESS
Abbesses have no spiritual jurisdiction, and can excrcise no
authority that is in any way connceted with the power of the
keys or of orders. During the Middle Ages, however, attempts
were not infrequently made to usurp this spiritual power of the
priesthood, and we read of Abbesses who besides being guilty of
many minor encroachments on the functions of the sacerdotal
office, presumed to interfere even in the administration of the
sacrament of penance and confessed their nuns. Thus, in the
Capitularics of Charlemagne, mention is made of "certain
Abbesses, who contrary to the established discipline of the
Church of God, presume to bless the people, impose their hands
on them, make the sign of the cross on the foreheads of men, and
confer the veil on virgins, employing during that ceremony the
blessing reserved exclusively to the priest," all of which
practice the bishops are urged to forbid absolutely in their
respective dioceses. (Thomassin, "Vetus et Nova Ecclesae
Disciplina," pars I, lib. II, xii, no. 17.) The "Monastieum
Cisterciense " records the stern inhibition which Innocent III,
in 1220, place upon Cistercian Abbesses of Burgos and Palencia
in Spain, "who blessed their religious, heard the confession of
their sins, and when reading the Gospel, presumed publicly to
preach." (Thomassin, op. cit., pars I, lib. III. xlix, no. 4.)
The Pope characterized the intrusion of these women as a thing
"unheard of, most indecorous, and highly preposterous." Dom
Martene, the Benedictine savant, in his work "De Antiquis
Ecclesiae Ritibus," speaks of other Abbesses who likewish
confessed their nuns, and adds, not without a touch of humour,
that "these Abbesses had evidently overated their spiritual
powers a trifle." And as late as 1658, the Sacred Congregation
Rites categorically condemned the acts of the Abbess of
Fontevrault in France, who of her own authority, obliged the
monks and nuns of her obedience to recite offices, say Masses,
and observe rites and ceremonies which had never been sanctioned
or approved of by Rome. (Analecta Juris Pontificii, VII, col.
348.) In this connection it must, however, be observed, that
when the older monastic rule prescribe confession to the
superor, they do not refer to sacramental confession, but to the
"chapter of faults" or the culpa, at which the religious accuse
themselves of ordinary external fault patent to all, and of
minor infractions of the rule. This "confession" may be made
either privately to the superior or publicly in the
chapter-house; no absolution is given and the penance assigned
is merely disciplinary. The "chapter of faults" is a form of
religious exercise still practised in all the monasteries of the
ancient orders.
But reference must be made to certain exceptional cases, where
Abbesses have been permitted, by Apstolical concession and
privilege, it is alleged, to exercise a most extraordinary power
of jurisdiction. Thus, the Abbess of the Cistercian Monastery of
Santa Maria la Real de las Huelgas, near Burgos, in Spain, was,
by the terms of her official protocol, a "noble lady, the
superior, prclate, and lawful administratrix in spirituals and
temporals of the said royal abbey, and of all the conents,
churches, and hermitages of its filiation, of the villages and
places under its jurisdiction, seigniory, and vassalage, in
virtue of Bulls and Apostolical concessions, with plenary
jurisdiction, privative, quasi-episopal, nullius diacesis."
(Florez, "Espana sagada," XXVII, Madrid 1772, col. 578.) By the
favour of the king, she was, moreover, invested with almost
royal prerogatives, and exercised an unlimited secular authority
over more than fifty villages. Like the Lord Bishops, she held
heer own courts, in civil and criminal cases, granted letters
dismissorial for ordination, and issued licenses authorizing
priests, within the limits of her abbatial jurisdicttion, to
hear confessions, to preach, and to engage in the cure of souls.
She was privilege also to confirm Abbesses, to impose censures,
and to convoke synods. ("Espana sagrada," XXVII, col. 581.) At a
General Chapter of the Cistercians held in 1189, she was made
Abbess General of the Order for the Kingdom of Leon and Castile,
with the privilege of convoking annually a general chapter at
Burgos. The Abbess of Las Huelgas retained her ancient prestige
up to the time of the Council of Trent.
A power of jurisdiction almost equal to that of the Abbess of
Las Huelgas was at one time exercised by the Cistercian Abbess
of Converano in Italy. Among the many privileges enjoyed by this
Abbess may be specially mentioned, that of appointing her own
vicar-general through whom she governed her abbatial territory;
that of selecting and approving confessors for the laity; and
that of authorizing clerics to have the cure of souls in the
churches under her jurisdiction. Every newly appointed Abbess of
Converano was likewise entitiled to receive the public "homage"
of her clergy,--the ceremony of which was sufficiently
elaborate. On the appointed day, the clergy, in a body repaired
to the abbey; at the great gate of her monastery, the Abbess,
with mitre and corsier, sat enthroned under a canopy, and as
each member of the clergy passed before her, he made his
obeisance, and kissed her hand. The clergy, however, wished to
do away with the distasteful practice, and, in 1709, appealed to
Rome; the Sacred Congregatior of Bishops and Regulars thereupon
modified some of ceremonial details, but recognized the right of
the Abbess to the homage. Finally, in 1750, the practice was
wholly abolished, and the Abbess deprived of all her power of
jurisdiction. (Cf. "Analecta Juris Pontificii," XXXVIII, col.
723: and Bizzari, "Collectanea," 322.) among other Abbesses said
to have exercised like powers of jurisdiction, for aa period at
least, may be mentioned the Abbess of Fontevrault in France, and
of Quedlinburg in Germany. (Ferraris, "Biblioth. Prompta;
Abbatissa.")
PROTESTANT ABBESSES OF GERMANY
In some parts of Germany, notably in Hanover, Wurtemberg,
Brunswick, and Schleswig-Holstein, a number of Protestant
educational establishments, and certain Lutheran sisterhoods are
directed by superiors who style themselves Abbesses even to the
present day. All these establishments were, at one time,
Catholic convents and monasteries, and the "Abbesses" now
presiding over them, are, in every instance, the Protestant
successors of a former line of Catholic Abbesses. The
transformation into Protestant community houses and seminaries
was effected, of course, during the religious revolution of the
sixteenth century, when the nuns who remained loyal to the
Catholic faith were driven from the cloister, and Lutheran
sisterhoods put in possessing of their abbeys. In many religious
communities, Protestantism was forcibly imposed on the members,
while in some few, particularly in North Germany, it was
voluntarily embraced. But in all these houses, where the ancient
monastic offices were continued the titles of the officials were
likewise retained. And thus there have been, since the sixteenth
century, both Catholic and Protestant Abbesses in Germany. The
Abbey of Quedinburg was one of the first to embrace the
Reformation. Its last Catholic Abbess, Magdalena, Princess of
Anhalt, died in 1514. As early as 1539, the Abbess Anna II of
Stolberg, who had been elected to the office when she was
scarcely thirteen years of age, introduced Lutheranism in all
the houses under her jurisdiction. The choir service in the
abbey church was abandoned, and the Catholic religion wholly
abrogated. The monastic offices were reduced to four, but the
ancient official titles retained. Thereafter the institution
continued as a Lutheran sisterhood till the secularization of
the abbey in 1803. The last two Abbesses were the Princess Anna
Amelia (d. 1787), sister of Frederick the Great, and the
Princess Sophia Albertina (d. 1829), daughter of King Adolphus
Frederick of Sweden. In 1542, under the Abbess Clare of the
house of Brunswick, the Sclamalkaldic League forcibly imposed
Protestantism on the members of the ancient and venerable
Benedictinre Abbey of Gandersheim; but though the Lutheran
intruders were driven out again in 1547 by Clare's father, Duke
Henry the Younger, a loyal Catholic, Lutheranism was permanently
introduced, a few years laater, by Julius, Duke of Brunswick.
Margaret, the last Catholic Abbess, diied in 1589, and after
that period Lutheran Abbesses were appointed to the foundation.
These continued to enjoy the imperial privileges of their
predecessors till 1802, when Gandersheim was incorporated with
Brunswick. Among the houses of minor importance still in
existence, the Abbey of Drubeck may be specially noticed. At one
time a Catholic convent, it fell into Protestant hands during
the Reformation. In 1687, the Elector Frederick William I of
Brandenburg granted the revenues of the house to the Counts of
Stolberg, stipulating, however, that women of noble birth and
professing the Evangelical faith, should always find a home in
the convent, be adequately provided for, and live there under
the government of an Abbess. The wish of the Elector is
apparently still respected.
SECULAR ABBESS IN AUSTRIA
In the Hradschin of Prague, there is a noted Catholic Imperial
Institute, whose directress always bears the title Abbess. The
institute, now the most exclusive and the best endowed of its
kind in Austria, was founded in 1755 by the Empress Maria
Theresa for impoverished noblewomen of ancient lineage. The
Abbess is always an Austrian Archduchess, and must be at least
eighteen years of age before she can assume the duties of her
office. Her insignia are a pectoral cross, the ring, the staff,
and a princely cornet. It was formerly an exclusive privilege of
this Abbess to crown the Queen of Bohemia -- a ceremony last
performed in 1808, for the Empress Maria Louisa. Candidates for
admission to the Institute must be twenty-nine years of age, of
irreproachable morals and able to trace back their noble
ancestry, paternal and maternal, for eight generations. They
make no vows, but live in community and are obliged to assist
twice daily at divine service in the Stifskirche, and must go to
confession and receive Holy Communion four times a year on
appointed days. They are all Hoffaehig.
NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION, BY COUNTRIES, OF ABBESSES
The Abbesses of the Black Benedictines number at present 120. Of
these there are 71 in Italy, 15 in Spain, 12 in Austro-Hungary,
11 in France (before the Associations Law), 4 in England, 3 in
Belgium, 2 in Germany, and 2 in Switzerland. The Cisterecians of
all Observances have a total of 77 Abbesses. Of these 74 belong
to the Cisterecians of the Common Observance, who have most of
their houses in Spain and in Italy. The Cistercians of the
Strict Observance have 2 Abbesses in France and 1 in Germany.
There are no Abbesses in the United States. In England the
superior of the following houses are Abbesses: St. Mary's Abbey,
Stanbrook, Worcesster: St. Mary's Abbey, East Bergholt, Suffolk;
St. Mary's Abbey, Oulton, Staffordshire; St. Scholastica's
Abbey, Teignmouth, Devon; St. Bridget's Abbey of Syon,
Chudleigh, Devon (Brigttine); St. Clare's Abbey, Darlington,
Durham (Poor Clares). In Ireland: Convent of Poor Clares,
Ballyjamesduff.
MONTALEMBERT, The Monks of the West (GASQUET'S ed., in 6 vols.,
New York, 1896), Bk. XV; GASQUET, English Monastic Life (London,
1808), viii; TAUSTON, The English Black Monks of St. Benedict
(London, 1808), I, vi; TAUNTON, The Law of the Church (St.
Louis, 1906), ECNENSTEIX, Women under Monasticism (London 1896),
FERRAIS, Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica (Rome 1885); BIZZARRI,
Collectanea S. C. Episc. Et Reg. (Rome 1885); PETRA, Comment. ad
Constitut. Apostolicas (Rome 1705); THOMASSINI, Vetus et Nova
Ecclesia Disciplina (Mainz, 1787); FAGNANI, Jus Conon., s.
Comment. in Decret, (Cologne, 1704); TAMBURINI, De jure et
privilegiis abbat. pralat., abbatiss., et monial (Cologne,
1691); LAURAIN, De Vinterrention des laiques, des diacres et des
abbesses dans Vadministration de lapcnitence (Paris, 1897);
SAGULLER, Lehrbuch des katholischen Kirchenrechts (Freiburg im
Breisgau, 1904).
THOMAS OESTREICH
Abbey
Abbey
A monastery canonically erected and autonomous, with a community
of not fewer than twelve religious; monks under the government
of an abbot; nuns under that of an abbess.
An autonomous priory is ruled by a superior who bears the title
of prior instead of that of abbot; but this distinction was
unknown in the first centuries of monastic history. Such were
the twelve great cathedral priories of England, immediately
governed by a prior, the diocesan being considered the abbot.
Other priories were founded as cells, or offshoots from the
great abbeys, and remained dependent on the parent house, by
whose abbot the prior was appointed, and was removable at will.
Originally the term monastery designated, both in the East and
in the West, the dwelling either of a solitary or of a
community; while caenobium, congregatio, fraternitas,
asceterion, etc. were applied solely to the houses of
communities. Monasteries took their names from either their
locality, their founders, or from some monk whose life has shed
lustre upon them; and later, from some saint whose relics were
there preserved, or who was locally an object of special
veneration. The monks of Egypt and Palestine, as may be gathered
from the "Peregrinatio Etheriae," also selected for their
monasteries sites famous for their connection with some biblical
event or personage. The first monks generally settled in
solitary places, away from the haunts of men, though sometimes
they were to be found also in cities like Alexandria, Rome,
Carthage, and Hippo. Monasteries, founded in country places, not
infrequently gathered around them settlements which,
particularly in England and Germany, in the course of time
developed into great centres of population and industry. Many
important towns owe their origin to this cause; but the tendency
never showed itself in Africa and the East. Though the sites
selected were often beautiful, many settlements, especially in
Egypt, were of set purpose made amid arid deserts. Nor was this
form of austerity confined to them. In the Middle Ages, the more
dismal and savage did this site appear to be, the more did it
appeal to the rigid mood of the Cistercians. Still, the
preference, at least with the majority of the monks of the West,
was for fertile lands, suitable for cultivation and agriculture.
The formation of communities dates from pre-Christian times, as
witness the Essenes; but the earliest Christian monastic
foundations of which we have definite knowledge were simply
groups of huts without any orderly arrangement, erected about
the abode of some solitary famous for holiness and asceticism,
around whom had gathered a knot of disciples anxious to learn
his doctrine and to imitate his way of life. Communities that
had outgrown the accommodation afforded by their monasteries
founded branch houses, and thus propagated themselves like the
swarming of a beehive. Bishops founded many monasteries, while
others owed their existence to the piety of princes and nobles,
who also generously endowed them. The Council of Chalcedon (451)
forbade the foundation of any monastery without the permission
of the local bishop, thus obviating the difficulties likely to
arise from irresponsible action. This became the universal law,
and it also safeguarded these institutions against disbandment
or ruin, since they enjoyed a certain sacredness of character in
popular estimation. Double monasteries were those in which dwelt
communities both of men and women at one and the same time,
under the government of a common superior, either an abbot or an
abbess. The Emperor Justinian suppressed them in the East on
account of the abuses which this arrangement might lead to; but
the custom long prevailed in England, France, and Spain, where
strict rules, keeping the sexes entirely separate at all times,
minimized the danger of scandals. Examples of these were the
houses of the Order of St. Gilbert of Sempringham; and in
France, Faremoutiers, Chelles, Remiremont, etc.
In the beginning, solitaries attached no importance whatever to
the form of design of their dwellings. They made use of anything
that Nature afforded, or their circumstances suggested. In the
East, especially in Egypt, abandoned tombs and burial caves; in
the West, cave and rude huts constructed of branches of trees,
mud, or sun-dried bricks, and furnished with the barest
necessities, sheltered many an early solitary. When the number
of such solitaries in a certain locality grew, and huts
increased in proportion, gradually they came to subject
themselves to a common superior and to follow a common rule of
life; but they had no common buildings except a church to which
they all repaired for the Sunday services. At Tabennae on the
Nile, in Upper Egypt, however, St. Pachomius laid the
foundations of the coenobitical life, arranging everything in an
organized manner. He built several monasteries, each containing
about 1,600 separate cells laid out in lines as an encampment,
where the monks slept and performed some of their manual tasks;
but there were large halls for their common needs, as the
church, refectory, kitchen, even an infirmary and a guest-house.
An enclosure protecting all these buildings gave the settlement
the appearance of a walled village; but every part was of the
utmost simplicity, without any pretense to architectural style.
It was this arrangement of monasteries, inaugurated by St.
Pachomius, which finally spread throughout Palestine, and
received the name of laurae, that is "lanes" or "alleys." In
addition to these congregations of solitaries, all living in
huts apart, there were caenobia, monasteries wherein the inmates
lived a common life, none of them being permitted to retire to
the cells of a laurae before they had therein undergone a
lengthy period of training. In time this form of common life
superseded that of the older laurae.
Monasticism in the West owes its development to St. Benedict
(480-543). His Rule spread rapidly, and the number of
monasteries founded in England, France, Spain, and Italy between
520 and 700 was very great. More than 15,000 Abbeys, following
the Benedictine Rule, had been established before the Council of
Constance in 1415. No special plan was adopted or followed in
the building of the first caenobia,or monasteries as we
understand the term today. The monks simply copied the buildings
familiar to them, the Roman house or villa, whose plan,
throughout the extent of the Roman Empire, was practically
uniform. The founders of monasteries had often merely to install
a community in an already existing villa. When they had to
build, the natural instinct was to copy old models. If they
fixed upon a site with existing buildings in good repair, they
simply adapted them to their requirements, as St. Benedict did
at Monte Cassino, not disdaining to turn to Christian uses what
had before served for the worship of idols. The spread of the
monastic life gradually effected great changes in the model of
the Roman villa. The various avocations followed by the monks
required suitable buildings, which were at first erected not
upon any premeditated plan, but just as the need for them arose.
These requirements, however, being practically the same in every
country, resulted in practically similar arrangements
everywhere.
The monastic lawgivers of the East have left no written record
of the principal parts of their monasteries. St. Benedict,
however, mentions the chief component parts with great
exactness, in his Rule, as the oratory, dormitory, refectory,
kitchen, workshops, cellars for stores, infirmary, novitiate,
guest-house, and by inference, the conference-room or
chapter-house. These, therefore, find a place in all Benedictine
abbeys, which all followed one common plan, occasionally
modified to suit local conditions. The chief buildings were
arranged around a quadrangle. Taking the normal English
arrangement, it will be found that the church was situated as a
rule on the north side, its high and massive walls affording the
monks a good shelter from the rough north winds. The buildings
of the choir, presbytery, and retrochapels extending more to the
east, gave some protection from the biting east wind. Canterbury
and Chester, however, were exceptions, their churches being on
the southern side, where also they were frequently found in warm
and sunny climates, with the obvious purpose of obtaining some
shelter from the heat of the sun. The choir was ordinarily
entered, in the normally planned English monasteries, by a door
at the junction of the northern and eastern cloisters, another
door at the western end of the north cloister being reserved for
the more solemn processions. Although in the course of time
there came into existence private rooms (chequer or saccarium)
wherein the officials transacted their business, and later still
private cells are to be met with, the cloisters were, in the
main, the dwelling-place of the entire community, and here the
common life was lived. The northern cloister, looking south, was
the warmest of the four divisions. Here was the prior's seat,
next to the door of the church; then those of the rest, more or
less in order. The abbot's place was at the northeastern corner.
The novice-master with his novices occupied the southern portion
of the eastern cloister, while the junior monks were opposite in
the western limb. The cold, sunless, southern walk was not used;
but out of it opened the refectory, with the lavatory close at
hand. In Cistercian houses it stood at right angles to the
cloister. Near the refectory was the conventual kitchen with its
various offices. The chapter-house opened out of the eastern
cloister, as near the church as possible. The position of the
dormitory was not so fixed. Normally, it communicated with the
southern transept, hence it was over the eastern cloister;
occasionally it stood at right angles to it, as at Winchester,
or on the western side, as at Worcester. The infirmary usually
appears to have been to the east of the dormitory, but no fixed
position was assigned to it. The guest-house was situated where
it would be least likely to interfere the privacy of the
monastery. In later days, when books had multiplied, a special
building for the library was added, at right angles to one of
the walks of the cloister. To these may be added the
calefactory, the parlour, or locutorium, the almonry, and the
offices of the obedientiaries; but these additional buildings
fitted into the general plan where they best might, and their
disposition differed somewhat in the various monasteries. The
English Cistercian houses, of which there are so many extensive
and beautiful remains, were mainly arranged after the plan of
Citeaux, in Burgundy, the mother-house, with slight local
variations.
The Carthusian monastery differed considerably in its
arrangements from those of other orders. The monks were
practically hermits, and each occupied a small detached cottage,
containing three rooms, which they left only to attend the
services of the church and on certain days when the community
met together in the refectory. These cottages opened out of
three sides of a quadrangular cloister, and on the fourth side
were the church, refectory, chapter-house, and other public
offices. Both laurae and caenobium were surrounded by walls
which protected the inmates either from the intrusion of
seculars or from the violence of marauders. No monk might go
beyond this enclosure without permission. The monks of the
earlier period considered this separation from the outer world
as a matter of prime importance. Women were never permitted to
enter the precincts of monasteries for men; even access to the
church was oftentimes denied them, or, if accorded admission, as
at Durham, they were relegated to a strictly limited space,
farthest removed from the monks' choir. Even greater strictness
was observed in safe-guarding the enclosure of nuns. The danger
of attack from Saracen hordes necessitated, in the case of
Eastern monasteries, the erection of lofty walls, with only one
entrance place many feet above the ground, reached by a stairway
or drawbridge that could be raised for defense. The monks of the
West, not standing in fear of such incursions, did not need such
elaborate safeguards, and therefore contented themselves with
ordinary enclosure walls. A religious of mature age and
character was selected for the responsible office of porter, and
to act as the channel of communication between the inmates and
the outside world. His chamber was always close by, so that he
might be at hand to fulfill his duties of receiving the poor and
of announcing the arrival of guests. In the Egyptian monasteries
the guest-house, situated near the entrance gateway, was place
under the charge of the porter, who was assisted by the novices.
St. Benedict so arranged that it should be a building distinct
from the monastery itself, although within the enclosure. It had
its own kitchen, served by two of the brethren appointed for
that purpose annually; a refectory where the abbot took his
meals with distinguished guests, and, when he thought fit,
invited some of the seniors to join him there; an apartment for
the solemn reception of guests, in which the ceremony of washing
their feet, as prescribed by the Rule was performed by the abbot
and his community; and a dormitory suitably furnished. Thus the
guests received every attention due to them by the laws of
charity and hospitality, and the community, while gaining the
merit of dispensing them in a large-hearted way, through the
appointed officials, suffered no disturbance of their own peace
and quiet. It was usual for the buildings dedicated for
hospitality to be divided into four: one for the reception of
guests of distinction, another for poor travelers and pilgrims,
a third for merchants arriving on business with the cellarer,
and the last for monk-visitors.
Formerly, as now, monastic communities always and everywhere
extended a generous hospitality to all comers as an important
way of fulfilling their social duties; hence monasteries lying
on or near the main highways enjoyed particular consideration
and esteem. Where guests were frequent and numerous, the
accommodation provided for them was on a commensurate scale. And
as it was necessary for great personages to travel accompanied
by a crowd of retainers, vast stables and other outhouses were
added to these monastic hostels. Later xenodochia, or
infirmaries, were attached to these guest-houses, where sick
travelers could receive medical treatment. St. Benedict ordained
that the monastic oratory should be what its name implied, a
place exclusively reserved for public and private prayer. In the
beginning it was a mere chapel, only large enough to hold the
religious, since externs were not admitted. The size of these
oratories were gradually enlarged to meet the requirements of
the liturgy. There was also usually an oratory, outside the
monastic enclosure, to which women were admitted.
The refectory was the common hall where the monks assembled for
their meals. Strict silence was observed there, but during the
meals one of the brethren read aloud to the community. The
refectory was originally built on the plan of the ancient Roman
triclinium, terminating in an apse. The tables were ranged along
three sides of the room near the walls, leaving the interior
space for the movements of the servers. Near the door of the
refectory was invariably to be found the lavatory, where the
monks washed their hands before and after meals. The kitchen,
was, for convenience, always situated near the refectory. In the
larger monasteries separate kitchens were provided for the
community (where the brethren performed the duties in weekly
turns), the abbot, the sick, and the guests. The dormitory was
the community bed-chamber. A lamp burned in it throughout the
night. The monks slept clothed, so as to be ready, as St.
Benedict says, to rise without delay for the night Office. The
normal arrangement, where the numbers permitted it, was for all
to sleep in one dormitory, hence there were often very large;
sometimes more than one was required. The practice, however,
gradually came in of dividing the large dormitory into numerous
small cubicles, one being allotted to each monk. The latrines
were separated from the main buildings by a passage, and were
always planned with the greatest regard to health and
cleanliness, a copious supply of running water being used
wherever possible.
Although St. Benedict makes no specific mention of a
chapter-house, nevertheless he does order monks to "come
together presently after supper to read the 'Collations.'" No
chapter-house appears on the plan of the great Swiss monastery
of St. Gall, dating back to the ninth century; in the early
days, therefore, the cloisters must have served for the meetings
of the community, either for instruction or to discuss the
affairs of the monastery. But convenience soon suggested a
special place for these purposes, and there is mention of
chapter-rooms in the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle (817). The
chapter-room was always on the cloister level, on to which it
opened. The cloisters, though covered, were generally open to
the weather, and were an adaptation of the old Roman atrium.
Besides providing a means of communication between the various
parts of the monastery, they were both the dwelling-place and
the workshop of the monks, and thus the word cloister became a
synonym for the monastic life. How the monks managed to live in
these open galleries during the winter months, in cold climates,
is a mystery; a room, called a "calefactory," heated by flues,
or in which a fire was kept up, where the monks might retire
occasionally to warm themselves, was provided in English
monasteries. On the Continent the practice in regard to the
novices differed somewhat from that prevailing in England. Not
being as yet incorporated into the community, they were not
permitted to dwell in the interior of the monastery. They had
their places in choir during the Divine Office, but they spent
the rest of their time in the novitiate. A senior monk, called
the novice-master, instructed them in the principles of the
religious life, and "tried their spirits if they be of God," as
St. Benedict's Rule prescribed. This period of probation lasted
a whole year. Abroad, the building set apart for the novices was
provided with its own dormitory, kitchen, refectory, workroom,
and occasionally even its own cloisters; it was, in fact, a
miniature monastery within a larger one.
The infirmary was a special building set apart for the
accommodation of the sick and infirm brethren, who there
received the particular care and attention they needed, at the
hands of those appointed to the duty. A herbal garden provided
many of the remedies. When death had brought its reward, the
monks were laid to rest in a cemetery within the monastic
precincts. The honour of burial amongst the religious, a
privilege highly esteemed, was also sometimes accorded bishops,
royal personages, and distinguished benefactors.
No monastery was complete without its cellars for the storing of
provisions. There were, in addition, the granaries, barns, etc.,
all under the care of the cellarer, as also such buildings and
outhouses as were used for agricultural purposes. Gardens and
orchards provided such vegetables and fruit as were cultivated
in the Middle Ages. The work of the fields did not, however,
occupy all the time of the monks. Besides cultivating the arts,
and transcribing manuscripts, they plied many trades, such as
tailoring, shoe-making, carpentering, etc., while others baked
the bread for daily consumption. Most monasteries had a mill for
grinding their own corn. It will thus be seen that an Abbey,
especially if it maintained a large community, was a little
city, self-contained and self-sufficing, as St. Benedict wished
it to be, to obviate as far as possible any necessity for the
monks to leave the enclosure. The enormous development of the
monastic life brought in its train a similar development in the
accommodation suitable for it. The monastic buildings, at first
so primitive, grew in time till they presented a very imposing
appearance; and the arts were requisitioned and ancient models
of architecture copied, adapted, and modified. The Basilican
plan, indigenous to Italy, was, naturally, that first adopted.
Its churches consisted of a nave and aisles, lighted by
clerestory windows, and terminating in a semicircular sanctuary
or apse. As time went on, the round arch, typical of Basilican
and Romanesque architecture, gradually gave place to the pointed
arch, peculiar to the new Gothic style, which is defined as
"perfected Romanesque." In England a tendency developed of
making the sanctuary rectangular instead of apsidal. The Normans
adopted this arrangement; and in their church-planning the
English oblong type of chancel gradually took the place of the
Romanesque and continental apse, and the Basilica plan was
abandoned for that of the Gothic, of a crossing or transept,
separating nave from chancel, the latter being extended to make
room for the choir. The final evolution of the style peculiar to
England is due to the Cistercians, the characteristic of whose
Abbeys was extreme simplicity and the absence of needless
ornament; their renunciation of the world was evidenced in all
that met the eye. Pinnacles, turrets, traceried windows, and
stained glass were, in their early days at least, proscribed.
And during the twelfth century Cistercian influence predominated
throughout Western Europe. The Cistercian churches of this
period, Fountains, Kirkstall, Jervaulx, Netly, and Tintern, have
rectangular chancels. These and other twelfth century churches
belong to what is known as the Transitional or Pointed Norman
style. Then followed the greater elaboration of Early and
Decorated English, as seen at Norwich and Worcester, or rebuilt
Westminster, culminating in the splendours of the Perpendicular,
or Tudor style, of which Henry VII's Chapel, at Westminster, is
so superb an example. Few English Abbeys of note, however, were
of homogeneous architecture; in fact, the mixture of styles,
though sometimes almost bewildering, adds to what is left of
these stately piles a greater picturesqueness ever pleasing to
archaeologist and artist.
The routine of a monastery could be maintained and supervised
only by the delegation of some of the abbot's authority to
various officials, who thus shared with him the burden of rule
and administration, and the transaction of
business--considerable and ever increasing in volume, where a
large and important monastery was concerned. The rule was
exercised in subordination to the abbot by the claustral prior
and sub-prior; the administration, by officials termed
obedientiaries who possessed extensive powers in their own
spheres. Their number varied in different houses; but the
following were the ordinary officials, together with their
duties, most commonly named in old Customals: The cantor, or
precentor, regulated the singing in the church service, and was
assisted by the succentor or sub-cantor. He trained the novices
to render the traditional chant properly. In some places he
acted as master to the boys of he claustral school. He was the
librarian and archivist, and in this capacity, had charge of the
precious tomes and manuscripts preserved in a special aumbry or
book-cupboard, and had to provide the choirbooks and those for
reading in the refectory. He prepared and sent round the briefs,
or mortuary-rolls, announcing the death of any of the brethren
to other monasteries. He was also one of the three official
custodians of the convent seal, holding one of the keys to the
chest where it was kept. To the sacrist and his assistants was
committed the care of the church fabric, together with its
sacred plate and vestments. He had to see to the cleaning and
lighting of the church, its decking for great festivals, and the
vestments used by the sacred vestments. The cemetery was also
under his charge. To his office pertained the lighting of the
entire of the entire monastery: and thus he superintended the
candle-making, and bought the necessary stores of wax, tallow,
and cotton for wicks. He slept in the church, and took his meals
near at hand, so that day and night the church was never left
without a guardian. His chief assistants were a revestiarius,
who saw to the vestments, the linen, and the hangings of the
church, and was responsible for their being kept in repair, or
replaced when worn out; and the treasurer, who was in special
charge of the shrines, reliquaries, sacred vessels, and other
plate.
The cellarer was the purveyor of all food-stuffs and drink for
the use of the community. This entailed frequent absences, and
hence exemption from much of the ordinary choir duties. He had
charge of the hired servants, whom he alone could engage,
dismiss, or punish. He superintended the serving up of the
meals. To his office belonged the supplying of fuel, carriage of
goods, repairs of the house, etc. He was aided by a sub-cellarer
and, in the bakery, by a granatorius, or keeper of the grain,
who saw to the grinding and quality of flour. The refectorian
had charge of the refectory, or "fratry," keeping it clean,
supplied with cloths, napkins, jugs, and dishes, and
superintended the laying of the tables. To him, too, was
assigned the care of the lavatory, and the providing it with
towels and, if necessary, hot water. The office of the kitchener
was one of great responsibility, for to him fell the portioning
out of the food, and it was only great experience which could
preserve the happy mean between waste and niggardliness. He had
under him an emptor, or buyer, experienced in marketing. He had
to keep a strict account of his expenditures and of the stores,
presenting in books weekly to the abbot for examination. He
presided over the entire kitchen department, seeing particularly
that all the utensils were kept scrupulously clean. The
discharge of his duty entailed frequent exemption from choir.
The weekly servers helped in the kitchen, under the kitchener's
orders, and waited at table during the meals. The concluded
their week's work on Saturday evenings by washing the feet of
the brethren. The infirmarian had to tend the sick with
affectionate sympathy, and, as far as might be necessary, was
excused from regular duties. If a priest, he said Mass for the
sick; if not, he got a priest to do so. He always slept in the
infirmary, even when there were no sick there, so as to be found
on the spot in case of emergency. The curious practice of
blood-letting, looked on as so salutary in ancient times, was
carried out by the infirmarian. The chief duty of the almoner
was to distribute the alms of the monastery, in food and
clothing, to the poor, with kindness and discretion; and; while
ministering to their bodily wants, he was not to forget those of
their soul also. He superintended the daily maundy or washing of
the feet of the poor selected for that purpose. Another of his
duties was to take charge of any school, other than the
claustral school, connected with the monastery. To him also fell
the task of seeing to the circulation of the mortuary-rolls.
In medieval days the hospitality extended to travelers by the
monasteries was of such constant occurrences that the
guest-master required a full measure of tact, prudence, and
discretion, as well as affability, since the reputation of the
house was in his keeping. His first duty was to see that the
guest-house always ready for the reception of visitors, whom he
was to receive, as enjoined by the Rule, as he would Christ
Himself, and during their stay to supply their wants, entertain
them, conduct them to the church services, and generally to hold
himself at their disposal. The chief duties of the chamberlain
of a monastery were concerned with the wardrobe of the brethren,
repairing or renewing their worn-out garments, and preserving
cast-off clothes for distribution to the poor by the almoner. He
had also to superintend the laundry. As it belonged to him to
provide cloth and other material for the clothing, he had to
attend the neighbouring fairs to purchase his stock. On him,
too, devolved the task of making preparation for the baths,
feet-washing, and shaving of the brethren.
The novice-master was of course one of the most important
officials in every monastery. In church, in the refectory, in
the cloister, in the dormitory, he kept a watchful control over
the novices, and spent the day teaching them and exercising them
in the rules and traditional practices of the religious life,
encouraging and helping those who showed real signs of a
monastic vocation. The weekly officials included, besides the
servers already referred to, the reader in the refectory, who
was enjoined to make careful preparation so as to avoid
mistakes. Also, the antiphoner whose duty it was to read the
invitatory at Matins, intone the first antiphon of the Psalms,
the versicles and responsories, after the lessons, and the
capitulum, or little chapter, etc. The hebdomadarian, or priest
of the week, had to commence all the various canonical Hours,
give all the blessings that might be required, and sing the High
Mass each day.
The greater Abbeys in England were represented through their
superiors in Parliament, in Convocations, and in Synod. Their
superiors were regularly included in the Commissions of Peace,
and in all things acted as, and were considered the equals of,
their great feudal neighbours. The alms bestowed on the poor by
the monasteries, together with those furnished by law, by the
parish priests, served to support them without recourse to the
more recent poor-laws. The lot of the poor was lightened, and
they knew that they could turn for help.and sympathy to the
religious houses. Poverty as witnessed in these days was
impossible in all the Middle Ages, because the monks, spread
over all the country, acted as merely stewards of God's
property, and dispensed it, if lavishly, yet with discretion.
The relations between the monks and their tenants were uniformly
kindly; the smaller cottagers were treated with much
consideration, and if it became necessary to inflict fines,
justice was tempered with mercy. The monastic manors were worked
somewhat on the principle of a co-operative farm. If we may form
a judgment on the whole of England from the "Durham Halmote
Rolls," the conditions of village life left little to be
desired. Provisions for watching over the public health were
enforced, a guard kept over water supplies, stringent measures
taken in regard to springs and wells, and the cleansing of ponds
and milldams. A common mill ground the tenants' corn, and their
bread was baked in a common oven. The relation of the monks to
their peasant-tenants was rather that of rent-chargers than of
absolute owners.
HENRY NORBERT BIRT
Abbo Cernuus
Abbo Cernuus
("The crooked").
French Benedictine monk of St-Germain-des-Pres in Paris,
sometimes called Abbo Parisiensis. He was born about the middle
of the ninth century, was present at the siege of Paris by the
Normans (885-86), and wrote a description of it in Latin verse,
with an account of subsequent events to 896, "De bellis
Parisiacae urbis." He also left some sermons for the
instructions of clerics in Paris and Poictiers (P.L., CXXII).
THOMAS WALSH
St. Abbon
St. Abbon
(Or ABBO.)
Born near Orleans c. 945; died at Fleury, 13 November, 1004, a
monk of the Benedictine monastery of Fleury sur Loire (Fleuret),
conspicuous both for learning and sanctity, and one of the great
lights of the Church in the stormy times of Hugh Capet of France
and of the three Ottos of Germany. He devoted himself to
philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy. In early life he was
called to England to direct the school of the newly founded
monastery of Ramsey, in the County of Huntingdon, after which he
returned to Fleury. On the death of the Abbot Oilbold, Abbon was
selected to succeed him, but one of the monks who had secured
the support of the King and his son Robert, the Bishop of
Orleans, contested the choice, and the matter assumed national
importance in the political forces it brought into play. It was
finally settled by the famous Gerbert (later Pope Sylvester II)
in favour of Abbon. He was present at the Synod of St. Basolus
(St. Basle), near Reims, at which Archbishop Arnolf was tried
for treason and deposed, to make way for Gerbert.When the
question arose about the marriage of Robert the Pious and
Bertha, Abbon was commissioned to arrange it with the Pope. On
the way to Rome he met Pope Gregory V, who was a fugitive from
the city from which the Antipope John XVII had expelled him.
Between the Pontiff and the Abbot the greatest esteem and
affection existed. The royal petition for a dispensation was
rejected. Abbon succeeded in bringing about the restoration of
Arnulf to the see of Reims. His influence contributed largely to
calm the excitement about the fear of the end of the world which
is said to have been general in Europe in 1000. His glourious
life had a sad ending. In 1004 he attemped to restore discipline
in the monastery of La Reole, in Gascony, by transferring some
of the monks of Fleury into that community. But the trouble
increased; fighting began between the two parties and when St.
Abbon endeavoured to separate them he was pieced in the side by
a lance. He concealed the wound and reached his cell, where he
died in the arms of his faithful disciple Aimoin, who has left
an account of his labours and virtues. The miracles wrought at
his tomb soon caused him to be regarded in the Church of Gaul as
a saint and martyr. His feast is kept 13 November.
Cochard, Les Saints de l'eglise d'Orleans (1879), 362-383; The
Month (1874), XX, 163; XXI, 28-42; Sackur, Die Cluniacenser
(1892), I, 270, 297; Pardiac, Hist. de St. Abbon de Fleury
(Paris, 1872).
T.J. CAMPBELL
Abbot
Abbot
A title given to the superior of a community of twelve or more
monks. The name is derived from abba, the Syriac form of the
Hebrew word ab, and means "father". In Syria, where it had its
origin, and in Egypt, it was first employed as a title of honour
and respect, and was given to any monk of venerable age or of
eminent sanctity. The title did not originally imply the
exercise of any authority over a religious community. From the
East the word passed over to the West, and here it was soon
received into general use to designate the superior of an abbey
or a monastery. In this article we shall treat:
I. Historical Origin;
II. Nature of the Office;
III. Kinds of Abbots;
IV. Mode of Election;
V. Benediction of the Abbot;
VI. Authority;
VII. Rights and Privileges;
VIII. Assistance at Councils;
IX. Distribution of Abbots.
I. HISTORICAL ORIGIN
Monastic communities were first organized in Egypt at the
beginning of the fourth century. St. Anthony introduced one form
of community life the eremitical when, about the year A.D. 305,
he undertook the direction and organization of the multitude of
hermits who had gathered about him in the Thebaid; a second --
the coenobitical, or conventual, type of monachism -- was
instituted by St. Pachomius, who, about the same time, founded
his first coenobium, or conventual monastery, at Tabennae in the
far south of Egypt. Both systems spread rapidly and were soon
firmly established in Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Asia
Minor. By the middle of the fourth century monachism had also
made its appearance in Europe, and here, at the beginning of the
sixth, St. Benedict of Nursia, gave it the definite form and
constitution which ultimately assured its triumph in the West.
Every group of hermits and every coenobium naturally had its
superior. The title given him varied. In the East he was usually
styled the elder, the senior, or also father of the monastery.
In Asia Minor and among the Greeks generally he was called
archimandrite ( archos, a chief, and mandra, a fold, monastery)
or hegumenos. Originally there seems to have been no appreciable
difference in the signification of these two words, but after
the period of Justinian the title archimandrite was jealously
reserved for the superiors of the older or of the more important
monasteries. Both names have, however, been permanently
retained, and are to this day the titles given to monastic
superiors in the Eastern Church. Cassian, who at the beginning
of the fifth century had transplanted Egyptian monachism to
Gaul, was addressed as Abbas, Pater, and Dominus; he himself
termed the superior of the monastery Praepositus. The word
praepositus, in the signification of a monastic ruler, appears
also in Roman Africa and elsewhere in the West, but towards the
close of the fifth century it had been almost entirely
supplanted by the term abbas. St. Benedict, in his Rule, written
about 529, assigned a subordinate position in the community to
the praepositus, and restricted the use of the title abbas to
the superior of the monastery. Through the Rule of the great
Patriarch of Western Monachism the application of the title
abbas was definitely fixed, and its use made general in the
West.
II. NATURE OF THE OFFICE
St. Benedict's conception of a monastic community was distinctly
that of a spiritual family. Every individual monk was to be a
son of that family, the, Abbot its father, and the monastery its
permanent home. Upon the Abbot therefore, as upon the father of
a family, devolves the government and direction of those who are
committed to his dare, and a paternal solicitude should
characterize his rule. St. Benedict says that "an abbot who is
worthy to have the charge of a monastery ought always to
remember by what title he is called," and that "in the monastery
he is considered to represent the person of Christ, seeing that
he is called by His name" (Rule of St. Benedict, ii). The
monastic system established by St. Benedict was based entirely
upon the supremacy of the abbot. Though the Rule gives
directions as to an abbot's government, and furnishes him with
principles upon which to act, and binds him to carry out certain
prescriptions as to consultation with others in difficult
matters etc., the subject is told to obey without question or
hesitation the decision of the superior. It is of course
needless to say that this obedience did not extend to the
commission of evil, even were any such command ever imposed
(Gasquet, English Monastic Life, London, 1904, p. 42). The
obedience shown to the Abbot is regarded as obedience paid to
God Himself, and all the respect and reverence with which he is
treated by the brethren of his house is paid him for Christ's
love, because as abbot -- father -- he is the representative of
Christ in the midst of the brethren. The whole government of a
religious house depends upon the Abbot. His will is supreme in
all things; yet, as the Rule says, nothing is to be taught,
commanded, or ordered beyond the precepts of the Lord. All the
officials who are to assist him in the government of the house,
are appointed by him and have their authority from him. He may
dismiss them at his discretion. The Abbot, by virtue of his
office, administers the temporal possessions of the community,
exercises a general supervision for the maintenance of monastic
discipline, provides for the keeping of the Rule, punishes and,
if need be, excommunicates the refractory, presides in choir
during the recitation of the Office, and at Divine Service, and
gives the blessings. In a word, uniting in his person the
threefold office of father, teacher, and ruler, it is the duty
of the Abbot to see that all things are administered wisely in
the House of God.
III. KINDS OF ABBOTS
An Abbot canonically elected and confirmed, and exercising the
duties of his office, is by the law of the Church styled a
Regular Abbot. Regular Abbots are prelates in the full sense of
the word, and their dignity is of three grades. An Abbot who
presides only over such persons, ecclesiastical and lay, as are
attached to his monastery, belongs to the lowest grade, and his
jurisdiction carries with it what is called the simple passive
exemption ( exemptio passiva) from the authority of the diocesan
bishop. If an Abbot's jurisdiction extends beyond the limits of
his abbey, over the inhabitants -- clergy and laity -- of a
certain district or territory which forms an integral part of a
bishop's diocese, he belongs to the middle grade ( praelatus
quasi nullius dioecesis) and his exemption is termed active (
exemptio activa). And when an Abbot has jurisdiction over the
clergy and laity of a district or territory (comprising one or
several cities and places) which forms no part whatever of any
diocese, his abbey is styled vere nullius dioecesis (of no
diocese) and, excepting a few rights only, for the exercise of
which the ordo episcopalis is required, his authority is in all
things equal to that of a bishop. This is the third and highest
grade of the dignity. There are no abbeys vere nullius in the
United States or in England. Among abbeys of this class in other
countries may be mentioned: in Italy, the arch-abbey of Monte
Cassino, founded by St. Benedict himself about 529; the abbey of
Subiaco, of which the titular is always a cardinal; the abbey of
St. Paul extra Muros (Rome); that of Monte Vergine near
Avellino, founded by St. William of Vercelli in 1124; and the
abbey of the Most Holy Trinity at Cava, dating back to 1011; in
Switzerland, the abbey of Einsiedeln, founded about 934; in
Hungary (Austria), the arch-abbey of St. Martin's,
(Martinsberg), established A.D. 1001 by St. Stephen, King of
Hungary; and in West Australia the abbey of New Norcia. All
exempt abbeys, no matter what the canonical title or degree of
their exemption, are under the immediate jurisdiction of the
Holy See. The term exempt is, strictly speaking, not applied to
an Abbot nullius, because his jurisdiction is entirely
extraterritorial. Within the limits of his territory such an
Abbot has, with few exceptions, the rights and privileges of a
bishop, and assumes all a bishop's obligations. Abbots of the
second grade, however, whose authority (though quasi-episcopal)
is intra-territorial, cannot be considered ordinaries, nor can
they lay any claim to the rights and privileges of bishops,
excepting those, of course, which have been especially granted
them by the Holy See.
When the monasteries in which the same regular observance is
followed, or the abbeys of the same province, district, or
country form a congregation i.e. a federation of houses to
promote the general interest of the order, the presiding Abbot
is styled the "Abbot President", or the "Abbot General." Thus,
the Cassinese Congregation of the Primitive Observance has at
its bead an Abbot General; the English Congregation, the
American-Cassinese, and the American-Swiss, have each an Abbot
President. The authority of the Abbot President is defined in
the statutes or constitution of each congregation. In the recent
confederation of the Benedictine Order all the Black Monks of
St. Benedict were united under the presidency of an "Abbot
Primate" (Leo XIII, Summum semper, 12 July, 1893); but the
unification, fraternal in its nature, brought no modification to
the abbatial dignity, and the various congregations preserved
their autonomy intact. The powers of the Abbot Primate are
specified, and his position defined, in a Decree of the Sacred
Congregation of Bishops and Regulars dated 16 September, 1893.
The primacy is attached to the Abbey and International
Benedictine College of St. Anselm, Rome, and the Primate, who
takes precedence of all other Abbots, is empowered to pronounce
on all doubtful matters of discipline, to settle difficulties
arising between monasteries to hold a canonical visitation, if
necessary, in any congregation of the order, and to exercise a
general supervision for the regular observance of monastic
discipline. Of late, however, certain branches of the
Benedictine Order seem to have lost their original autonomy to
some extent. The Reformed Cistercians of La Trappe, for
instance, are by a Decree of Pope Leo XIII, 8 May, 1892, placed
under the authority of an Abbot-General. The Abbot-General has
full authority to pass decision upon all current affairs and
difficulties. On account of the antiquity or the preeminence of
the abbeys over which they preside, the honorary title of
Arch-abbot is bestowed upon the superiors of certain
monasteries. Monte Cassino, "the Cradle of Western Monachism",
St. Martinsberg in Hungary, St. Martin's of Beuron, in Germany,
and St. Vincent's, Pennsylvania, the first Benedictine
foundation in America, are presided over by Arch-abbots.
A further variety of Abbots-Regular are the "Titular Abbots." A
Titular Abbot holds the title of an abbey which has been either
destroyed or suppressed, but he exercises none of the functions
of an Abbot, and has in actu no subjects belonging to the
monastery whence he derives his title. The law of the Church
recognizes also "Secular Abbots," i.e. clerics who, though not
professed members of any monastic order, nevertheless possess an
abbacy as an ecclesiastical benefice, with the title and some of
the honours of the office. These benefices belonged originally
to monastic houses, but on the suppression of the abbeys the
benefice and the title were transferred to other churches. There
are various classes of Secular Abbots; some have both
jurisdiction and the right to use the pontifical insignia;
others have only the abbatical dignity without either
jurisdiction or the right to pontificalia; while yet another
class holds in certain cathedral churches the first dignity and
the privilege of precedence in choir and in assemblies, by
reason of some suppressed or destroyed conventual church now
become the cathedral. In the early Middle Ages the title Abbot
was borne not only by the superiors of religious houses, but
also by a number of persons, ecclesiastical and lay, who had no
connection whatever with the monastic system. St. Gregory of
Tours, for instance, employed it in his day to designate the
principal of a body of secular clergy attached to certain
churches; and later, under the Merovingians and Carlovingians,
it was applied to the chaplain of the royal household, Abbas
Palatinus, and to the military chaplain of the king, Abbas
Castrenisis. From the time of Charles Martel onward to the
eleventh century it came to be adopted even by laymen, the
Abbacomites, or Abbates Milites, mostly nobles dependent on the
court, or old officers, to whom the sovereign would assign a
portion of the revenues of some monastery as a reward for
military service. "Commendatory Abbots" (secular ecclesiastics
who held an abbacy not in titulo, but in commendam) had their
origin in the system of commendation prevalent during the eighth
and succeeding centuries. They were in the first instance merely
temporary trustees, appointed to administer the estates of an
abbey during a vacancy; but in the course of time they retained
the office for life, and claimed a portion of the revenues for
their maintenance. The practice of nominating Commendatory
Abbots eventually led to serious abuses; it was greatly checked
by the Council of Trent, and has in modern times entirely
disappeared from the Church.
IV. MODE OF ELECTION
In the early days of monastic institutions the founder of a
religious house was usually its first superior; in every other
instance the Abbot was appointed or elected. Some Abbots indeed
selected their own successors, but the cases were exceptional.
In many places, when a vacancy occurred, the bishop of the
diocese would choose a superior from among the monks of the
convent, but it appears that from the very beginning the
appointment of an Abbot rested generally with the monks
themselves. St. Benedict ordained (Rule, lxiv) that the Abbot
should be chosen "by the general consent of the whole community,
or of a small part of the community, provided its choice were
made with greater wisdom and discretion." The bishop of the
diocese, the Abbots and Christian men of the neighbourhood were
called upon to oppose the election of an unworthy man. Every
religious house professing his Rule adopted the method
prescribed by the great monastic legislator, and in the course
of time the right of the monks to elect their own Abbot came to
be generally recognized, particularly so when it had been
solemnly confirmed by the canons of the Church see Thomassin,
Vetus et Nova Eccl. Disciplina, Pt. I, III, c. xxxii, no. 6).
But during the Middle Ages, when monasteries had grown wealthy
and powerful, kings and princes gradually encroached on the
rights of the monks, until in most countries the sovereign had
wholly usurped the power of nominating abbots for many of the
greater houses in his realm. This interference of the court in
the affairs of the cloister was in the process of time the
source of many evils and the occasion of grave disorders, while
in its effect, on monastic discipline it was uniformly
disastrous. The rights of the cloister were finally restored by,
the Council of Trent. According to the present legislation, the
Abbot is elected for life by the secret suffrages of the
community's professed members in sacris. To be eligible he must
have all the qualifications required by the canons of the
Church. It is furthermore necessary that he should be a priest,
a professed member of the order, of legitimate birth, and at
least twenty-five years of age. The election, to be valid, must
be herd in the manner prescribed by the common law of the Church
(cf. Quia propter. -- De elect., I, 6; and Cone. Trid., sess.
XXV, c. vi, De reg.), and as determined in the statutes or
constitutions of each congregation. In the English and American
congregations the Abbot of a monastery is elected for life by a
two-thirds vote of the professed members in sacris of the
chapter. The Abbots themselves elect the abbot president. Exempt
abbeys under the immediate jurisdiction of the Pope must, within
the space of a month, apply to the Holy See for a confirmation
of the election; non-exempt houses, within three months, to the
bishop of the diocese. The confirmation confers upon the
Abbot-elect the jus in re, and having obtained it he enters at
once upon the duties and privileges of his office. A canonical
perpetuity attaches to the abbatial dignity; semel abbas, semper
abbas; and even after a resignation the dignity endures, and the
title is retained. Benedictine abbeys in the United States and
in England enjoy exemption; for America, the newly-elected
Abbots are confirmed directly by the Pope; in England, however,
according to the recent Constitution, "Diu quidem est" (1899),
they are confirmed by the Abbot President in the name of the
Holy See.
V. BENEDICTION OF THE ABBOT
After his ecclesiastical confirmation, the newly elected Abbot
is solemnly blessed according to the rite prescribed in the
"Pontificale Romanum" ( De benedictione Abbatis). By the
Constitution of Benedict XIII, Commissi Nobis, 6 May, 1725, all
Regular Abbots elected for life are now obliged to receive this
blessing (or, at least, to thrice formally request it) within
the space of a year, from the bishop of the diocese; if they
fail to have the ceremony performed within the required time,
they incur ipso jure a suspension from office for the period of
one year. Should the petition be refused for the third time,
either by the diocesan or the metropolitan, an Abbot is free to
receive benediction from any bishop in communion with Rome. The
Constitution at the same time expressly declares that the
Abbot-elect may licitly and validly perform all the duties of
his office during the interval preceding his solemn benediction.
It must be noted, however, that the legislation enforced by
Benedict XIII does not affect those Abbots who are privileged to
receive the blessing from their regular superiors, nor those who
by their election and confirmation are ipso facto regarded as
blessed by the Pope. The blessing is not in se essential for the
exercise of an Abbot's order and office; it confers no
additional jurisdiction, and imparts no sacramental grace or
character. An Abbot nullius may call upon any bishop in union
with the Holy See to bestow the abbatial blessing. By the recent
Constitution of Leo XIII, "Diu quidem est." 1899, the Abbots of
the English Congregation are bound within six months of their
election to present themselves to the ordinary of the diocese to
be blessed by Apostolical authority; and, if the diocesan be
prevented, they can receive the blessing from any Catholic
bishop.
The ceremony, which in solemnity differs but slightly from that
of a bishop's consecration, takes place during the Holy
Sacrifice of the Mass, after the Epistle. The essentials of the
episcopal order are of course omitted, but before his
benediction the Abbot takes the oath of allegiance to the Holy
See and, like the bishop, is subjected to a canonical
examination. He receives the insignia of his office -- the
mitre, crosier, ring, etc. -- from the hands of the officiating
prelate, and at the Offertory presents to him two small casks of
wine, two loaves of bread, and two large wax tapers; he says the
Mass. with the bishop and receives Holy Communion from him.
During the singing of the Te Deum the newly blessed Abbot, with
mitre and crosier, is conducted through the nave of the church
by the two assistant Abbots, and blesses the people. Upon his
returning to his seat in the sanctuary (if in his own church),
the monks of the community come, one by one, and, kneeling
before their new superior, pay him their homage, and receive
from him the kiss of peace. The ceremony is concluded by a
solemn blessing bestowed by the newly installed Abbot standing
at the High Altar. According to the Pontificale Romanum, the day
set apart for the function ought to be a Sunday or a feast day.
The solemn rite of benediction, once conferred, need not be
again received when an Abbot is translated from one monastery to
another.
VI. AUTHORITY OF THE ABBOT
The authority of an Abbot is of two; kinds, one relating to the
external government of the house, the other to the spiritual
government of his subjects. The first is a paternal or domestic
authority, based on the nature of religious life and on the vow
of obedience, the second a power of quasi-episcopal
jurisdiction, by virtue of which he is truly a prelate. His
domestic authority empowers the Abbot to administer the property
of the abbey, to maintain the discipline of the house, to compel
the religious, even by penalties, to observe the Rule and the
Constitutions of the Order, and to ordain whatever else may be
essential for the preservation of peace and order in the
community. The power of jurisdiction which the Abbot possesses,
both in foro interno and in foro externo, authorizes him to
absolve his subjects from all cases of conscience not specially
reserved, and to delegate this power to the priests of his
monastery; to reserve to himself the eleven eases enumerated in
the Constitution of Clement VIII, "Ad futuram rei memoriam"; to
inflict ecclesiastical censures; and to dispense the members of
his house in certain eases for which a dispensation is usually
obtained from the bishop of the diocese. He cannot, of course,
dispense a religious from the vows of poverty, chastity, and
obedience. Abbots, like the monks over whom they ruled, were
originally laymen, and subject to the bishop of the diocese. It
was not long, however, before they were enrolled in the ranks of
the clergy. Towards the close of the fifth century by far the
greater number of Abbots in the East had received ordination.
The change was effected more slowly in the West, but even here
few were found at the end of the seventh century who had not
been clothed with the dignity of the priesthood. A council held
at Rome, 826, under Pope Eugene II, enjoined the ordination of
Abbots, but the canon seems not to have been rigidly enforced,
for as late as the eleventh century we read of some who were
only deacons. The Council of Poitiers (1078) finally obliged all
Abbots under pain of deprivation to receive priest's orders.
(Thomassin, Pt. I, I, iii, passim.) From this time forward the
power and influence of Abbots steadily increased in Church and
State, until towards the close of the Middle Ages their position
was everywhere regarded as one of the highest distinction. In
Germany eleven Abbots held rank as princes of the Empire, and
with all the rights and privileges of princes took part in the
deliberation of the Diets. The Abbots of Fulda exercised even
sovereign power over ten square miles round the abbey. In the
Parliament of England "abbots formed the bulk of the spiritual
peerage. The position held by them throughout every part of the
country gave yet a further weight to their great position as
noblemen and local magnates. As such they went pari passu with
baron or earl of the noblest lineage. On the blazoned Roll of
the Lords, the Lord Richard Whiting and the Lord Hugh Farringdon
(Abbots of Glastonbury and of Reading) went hand in hand with a
Howard and a Talbot" [Gasquet, Henry VIII and the English
Monast. (London, 1888), I, 25]. In France, Spain, Italy, and
Hungary their power and influence were equally great, and
continued so generally up to the time of the Council of Trent.
VII. RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES
All regular Abbots have the right to give the tonsure and to
confer minor orders on the professed members of their house. As
early as 787 the Second Council of Nicaea permitted Abbots
(provided they were priests, and had received the solemn rite of
benediction) to give the tonsure and to advance their monks to
the order of lector (Thomassin, Pt., I. c., I. iii, c. xvii, no.
3). The privilege granted by this Council was gradually extended
until it embraced all the minor orders, and in the course of
time Abbots were authorized to confer them not only on their
regular but also on their secular subjects [Wernz, Jus
Decretalium (Rome, 1899) ii, 47, note]. The Council of Trent,
however, decreed that "it shall not henceforth be lawful for
abbots, . . . howsoever exempted, . . . to confer the tonsure
and minor orders on any but their regular subjects, nor shall
the said abbots grant letters dimissory to any secular clerics
to be ordained by others" [Can. et Decret. Conc. Trid. (ed.
Richter et Schulte), p. 197]. From this decree of the Council it
is quite clear that Abbots still have the right to confer the
tonsure and minor orders, but it is equally clear that they may
confer them lawfully only on their regular subjects. Novices,
therefore. oblates, regulars of another order or congregation,
and seculars cannot be advanced by the Abbot. Even the Abbots
styled vere nullius, who exercise an episcopal jurisdiction in
their territory, may not without a special privilege give minor
orders to their secular subjects [Santi, Praelect. Jur. Can.
(New York, 1898), I, 125 sq., and Can. et Decret. Cone. Trid.
(ed. Richter et Schulte), 197 sq., where also the decisions of
the Sacred Cong. of the Council on this subject may be found].
On the question of the validity of orders conferred by an Abbot
who goes beyond the limits of the faculties extended by the Holy
See, canonists disagree. Some pronounce such orders absolutely
invalid, others maintain that they are illicitly conferred but
nevertheless valid. The opinion of the latter seems to be
sustained by various decisions of the Sacred Cong. of the
Council (Santi, op. cit., p. 128 sq.; cf. Benedict XIV, De Syn.
Dioec. II, c. xi, no. 13). It is a much-disputed question
whether Abbots have ever been permitted to confer the
subdiaconate and the diaconate. Many canonists hold that the
subdiaconate, being of merely ecclesiastical institution, was
formerly amounted one of the minor orders of the Church, and
infer that before the time of Urban II (1099), Abbots could have
given that order. But the further claim that Abbots have also
conferred the diaconate cannot, apparently, be sustained, for
the Bull of Innocent VIII, "Exposcit tuae devotionis" (9 April,
1489), in which this privilege is said to have been granted to
certain Cistercian Abbots, makes no reference whatever to the
diaconate -- "Facta inspectione in Archivis (Vaticani) . . .
bulla quidem ibidem est reperta, sed mentio de diaconatu in
eadem deest." [See Gasparri, Tract. can. de S. Ordinatione, II,
n. 798; cf. also P. Pie de Langogne, "Bulle d Innoeent VIII aux
abbes de Citeaux pour les ordinations in sacris" (Etudes
franciscaines, fev., 1901, 129 sq.)] Pauhoelzl, in "Studien und
Mittheil. aus dem Benedictiner und Cistercienser-Orden", 1884,
I, 441 sq. gives the Bull and defends its authenticity. By the
law of the Church Abbots may grant letters dimissorial to their
regular subjects, authorizing and recommending them for
ordination, but they cannot give dimissorials to seculars
without incurring suspension. Abbots are furthermore privileged
to dedicate their abbey church and the cemetery of the
monastery, and authorized to reconcile them in case of
desecration. They can bless church vestments, altar linens
ciboria, monstrances, etc., for their own subjects, and
consecrate altars and chalices for their own churches. As
prelates, they hold the rank immediately after the bishops,
being preceded only by the protonotarii participantes (see CURIA
ROMANA), and by the vicar-general in his diocese. It may be
added that the Abbots nullius dioecesis are preconized by the
Pope in a public consistory, and that, within the territory over
which they exercise jurisdiction, their name, like that of a
diocesan, is inserted in the canon of the Mass.
The use of the pontifical insignia -- mitre, crosier, pectoral
cross, ring, gloves, and sandals -- which Abbots commonly have,
is one of their most ancient privileges. It cannot be definitely
ascertained when the privilege was first granted, but as early
as 643 the Abbey of Bobbio in Italy is said to have obtained a
constitution from Pope Theodore confirming a grant made to the
Abbot by Honorius I. In England the pontifical insignia were
assigned first to the Abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, in
1063 and nearly a hundred years later to the Abbot of St. Alban
s. The privilege was gradually extended to other abbeys until,
at the close of the Middle Ages, every monastic house of
importance in Europe was presided over by a mitred Abbot. The
rights of Abbots to pontificalia are now regulated by the Decree
of Pope Alexander VII (S. Cong. of Rites, 27 September, 1659).
By the terms of this decree the days on which an Abbot is
permitted to pontificate are limited to three days in the year.
The use of the seventh candle, customary at a solemn pontifical
Mass, is forbidden. The Abbot's mitre is to be made of less
costly material than a bishop's, and the pastoral staff is to be
used with a white pendant veil. The Abbot is not to have a
permanent throne in his monastic church, but is allowed, only
when celebrating pontifically, to have a movable throne on two
steps and a simple canopy. He has also the privilege of using
mitre and crosier whenever the ritual functions require them. As
a mark of special distinction, some Abbots are permitted by the
Holy See to use the cappa magna, and all abbots nullius may wear
a violet biretta and zucchetto. "A recent decree of the S.C.R.
(13 June, 1902) has regulated in accordance with former
legislation the rights of the abbots of the English Congregation
to pontificalia. According to this decree the English abbots can
celebrate pontifically not only in their own abbatial churches,
but also without the leave of the diocesan bishop in all other
churches served by their monks with cure of souls. They can also
give leave to other abbots of their Congregation to pontificate
in their churches. They can use the prelatical dress i.e.
rochet, mozzetta and mantelletta outside their own churches"
[Taunton, The Law of the Church (London, 1906), p. 3]. The
Abbots of the American-Cassinese and of the American-Swiss
Congregations have the same privileges.
VIII. ASSISTANCE AT COUNCILS
Ecclesiastical councils were attended by Abbots at a very early
period. Thus, in 448, twenty-three archimandrites or Abbots
assisted at that held by Flavian, the Patriarch of
Constantinople, and with thirty bishops signed the condemnation
of Eutyches. In France under the Merovingian kings, they
frequently appeared at ecclesiastical synods as the delegates of
bishops, while in Saxon England and in Spain the presence of
monastic superiors at the councils of the Church was nothing
uncommon. Their attendance did not, however, become a general
practice in the West until after the Eighth Council of Toledo
(653) where ten Abbots had been present, and had subscribed to
the decrees by virtue of their pastoral charge. From the eighth
century onward Abbots had a voice also in the oecumenical
councils of the Church. It must be remarked that in later
centuries Abbots were invited to assist at such councils and
were permitted to give a decisive vote, mainly because they too,
like the bishops, exercised a power of jurisdiction in the
Church of God. In this connection Pope Benedict XIV says: "Item
sciendum est quod quando in Conciliis generalibus soli episcopi
habebant vocem definitivam, hoc fuit quia habebant
administrationem populi . . . Postea additi fuere Abbates eadem
de causa, et quia habebant administrationem subjectorum (De Syn.
dioec. XIII, c. ii, no. 5). A newly appointed Abbot, before he
receives the solemn benediction at the hands of the bishop takes
an oath that he will discharge faithfully ail the duties of his
office, specifying among others that of attending councils:
"Vocatus ad synodum, veniam, nisi praepeditus fuero canonica
praepeditione" (Pontif. Rom., De Benedictione Abbatis). In the
performance of this duty the Abbot must be guided by the
regulations of the sacred canons. According to the present
practice of the Church all Abbots nullius dioecesis, or with
quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, have a right to assist at
oecumenical councils. They have moreover, the right of a
decisive vote, and may subscribe to the decrees. The
Abbots-President of congregations and the abbots-general of an
entire order are also present and cast a decisive vote, though
only by virtue of privilege. Other classes of Abbots were not
admitted to the Vatican Council in 1870. In provincial synods
and in plenary or national councils the Abbots nullius have de
jure a decisive vote, and sign the decrees after the bishops.
Attendance at these synods is for them not merely a right, but
also an obligation. By the terms of the Council of Trent (Sess.
XXIV, De ref., c. ii) they are obliged, "like the bishops who
are not subject to any archbishop, to make choice of some
neighbouring metropolitan, at whose synods they shall be bound
to appear," and they are further directed "to observe and to
cause to be observed whatsoever shall be therein ordained."
Though other Abbots must not be called de jure to provincial or
to national councils, it is yet the custom, in most countries,
to invite also the mitred Abbots who have actual jurisdiction
only over their monasteries. Thus, at the Second Plenary Council
of Baltimore (1866) both the Abbot of the Cistercians and the
Abbot-President of the American-Cassinese Benedictines were
present, and signed the decrees. At the Third Plenary Council of
Baltimore (1884) six mitred Abbots assisted, two of whom, the
Abbots-President of the American-Cassinese and of the
American-Swiss Congregations of Benedictines, exercised the
right of a decisive vote, while the other four had only a
consultative voice and subscribed to the decrees merely as
assenting, not as defining. And this is the practice of the
Church generally. Exempt Abbots have no obligation to attend
diocesan synods.
IX. DISTRIBUTION OF ABBOTS
The Black Monks of St. Benedict have at present seven Abbots
nullius dioecesis, located as follows: Italy, 4; Switzerland, 1;
Hungary, 1; and West Australia, 1; 86 Abbots exercising actual
jurisdiction over their monasteries: Austria, 19; United States,
14; France, 9 (before the Law of Associations); Italy, 9;
Germany, 7; England, 6; Hungary, 5; Switzerland, 4; Brazil, S.
A., 3; Holland, 3; Spain, 3; Belgium, 2; Scotland l; West
Australia 1. They have also nine titular, and three resigned
Abbots.
The Cistercian Abbots of the Three Observances number
fifty-seven. Of these the Cistercians of the Common and of the
Lesser Observance have nineteen: Italy, 3; Belgium, 2;
Austro-Hungarian Province, 8; and the Swiss-German Congregation
3. The Congregation of Senanque, to which the three Abbots of
the Lesser Observance belong, is now dispersed by the
Associations Law of France. The Cistercians of the Strict
Observance (Trappists) have thirty-eight: France, 18 (not
expelled); Belgium, 4; Italy, 3; United States, Austria, and
Ireland, two each; Canada, China, England, Germany, Holland, and
Spain, one each. The Cistercians have also two Abbots nullius
dioecesis.
In Italy, the Camaldolese Vallombrosans, Silvestrines, and
Olivetans, all branches of the Benedictine Order, have each a
small number of Abbots. Monte Oliveto Maggiore belonging to the
Olivetans is an abbey nullius dioecesis. Some few houses of the
various Congregations of Canons Regular, of the Antonians, of
the Armenian Benedictines, and of the Basilians, are also under
the direction of Abbots. Mitred Abbots in the United States are
the Abbots of St. Vincent's Arch-Abbey, Beatty, Pa.; St. John's
Abbey, Collegeville, Minn.; St. Benedict's Abbey Atchison, Kan.;
St. Mary's Abbey, Newark, N. J.; Maryhelp Abbey, Belmont, N. C.;
St. Bernard's Abbey, St. Bernard, Ala.; St. Procopius's Abbey
Chicago, Ill.; St. Leo's Abbey, St. Leo, Fla.; St. Meinrad's
Abbey, St. Meinrad, Ind.; Immaculate Conception Abbey,
Conception, Mo.; New Subiaco Abbey, Spielerville, Ark.; St.
Joseph's Abbey, Covington, La.; St. Mary's Abbey, Richardton, N.
Dak.; St. Benedict's Abbey, Mount Angel, Ore.; Gethsemani Abbey,
Ky.; New Melleray Abbey, near Dubuque, Iowa; and the Sacred
Heart Abbey, Oklahoma.
Mitred Abbots in England are the Titular Abbot of Reading, the
Abbot of St. Gregory's Abbey, Downside, Bath; St. Lawrence's
Abbey, Ampleforth York; St. Edmund's Abbey of Douay,
Woolhampton, Reading; St. Augustine's Abbey, Ramsgate; St.
Thomas's Abbey, Erdington, Birmingham; Buckfast Abbey,
Buckfastleigh, Devon; St. Michael's Abbey, Farnborough
(Benedictines of Solesmes) Abbey of St. Pierre, Appuldurcombe,
Isle of Wight (Benedictines of Solesmes); St. Bernard's Abbey
Coalville, near Leicester (Cistercian), The Canons Regular of
the Lateran, Spettisbury, Dorsetshire.
In Scotland; St. Benedict's Abbey, Fort Augustus, Inverness.
In Ireland: Mt. Melleray Abbey, Cappoquin, Mt. St. Joseph's
Abbey, Roscrea, Tipperary.
In West Australia: Holy Trinity Abbey, New Norcia (nullius
dioecesis).
In Canada: Abbey of Notre Dame du Lac, Lac des Deux Montagnes.
Rule of St. Benedict in P.L., LXVI, 933 sq. (ed. SCHMIDT
Ratisbon, 1880; 2d ed., ibid., 1893) GASQUET, English Monastic
Life (London, 1904); TAUNTON, the English Black Monks of St.
Benedict (London, 1898); IDEM, The Law of the Church (St. Louis,
1906); DIGBY, Mores Catholici; The Ages of Faith (London, 1845
reprint, New York, 1906 Bk. X, vol. III); MONTALEMBERT, The
Monks of the West from St. Benedict to St. Bernard (ed. GASQUET,
New York 1896) DOYLE, The Teaching of St. Benedict (London,
1887), DUGDALE, Monasticon (London, 1817) MABILLON, Annales
Ordinis S. Benedicti (Lucca, 1739), I, ii; THOMASSIN, Vetus et
Nova Eccl. Discipl. (Mainz, 1787) MARTENE, De Antiq. Eccl.
Ritibus (Bassano, 1788), II; Du CANGE, Gloss. Med. et Infim.
Latinit., s. v. Abbas; FERRARIS, Prompta Bibl. Can. (Rome, 1885)
TAMBURINI, De Jure et Privileg. Abbat. Praelat. (Cologne, 1691)
FAGNANI, Jus Canon., s. Commentaria in V Libros Decretalium
(ibid., 1704) LUCIDI, De Visitatione Sacrorum Liminum (Rome,
1878); BESSE, Les moines d orient (Paris, 1900); CHAMARD, Abbes
au moyen age, in Rev. des questions historiques (1885), XXXVIII,
71-108 BESSE, in Dict. d'archeol. chret. (Paris, 1903) LANGOGNE,
in Dict. de theol. cath., s.v. Abbes (Paris, 1905) SAeGMUeLLER,
Lehrb. des kathol. Kirchenrechts (Freiburg, 1905) HERGENR
THER-HOLWECK, Lehrb. des kathol. Kirchenrechts (ibid. 1905);
HEUSER in Kirchenlex., s.v. Abt (2d ed., ibid., 1882) For an
extensive bibliography, see SCHERER, Handbuch des Kirchenrechts
(Gratz, 1886), II, 729 sq. 753.
THOMAS OESTREICH
Henry Abbot
Henry Abbot
Layman, martyred at York, 4 July, 1597, pronounced Venerable in
1886. His acts are thus related by Challoner:
A certain Protestant minister, for some misdemeanour put into York
Castle, to reinstate himself in the favour of his superiors,
insinuated himself into the good opinion of the Catholic prisoners,
by pretending a deep sense of repentance, and a great desire of
embracing the Catholic truth . . . So they directed him, after he
was enlarged, to Mr. Henry Abbot, a zealous convert who lived in
Holden in the same country, to procure a priest to reconcile him . .
. Mr. Abbot carried him to Carlton to the house of Esquire
Stapleton, but did not succeed in finding a priest. Soon after, the
traitor having got enough to put them all in danger of the law,
accused them to the magistrates . . . They confessed that they had
explained to him the Catholic Faith, and upon this they were all
found guilty and sentenced to die.
The others, Errington, Knight, and Gibson, were executed on 29
November, 1596; Abbot was reprieved till the next July.
PATRICK RYAN
Methods of Abbreviation
Methods of Abbreviation
The use of abbreviations is due, in part, to exigencies arising
from the nature of the materials employed in the making of
records, whether stone, marble, bronze, or parchment. Lapidaries
engravers, and copyists are under the same necessity of making
the most of the space at their disposal. Such abbreviations,
indeed, are seldom met with at the beginning of the Christian
era material of all kinds was plentiful and there was
consequently, no need to be sparing in the use of it. By the
third or fourth century, however, it had grown to be scarce and
costly, and it became the artist's aim to inscribe long texts on
surfaces of somewhat scanty proportions. We shall not pause here
to discuss the use of abbreviations in ordinary writing. The
Romans possessed an alphabet known by the name of Notae
Tironienses, which served the same purpose as our modern systems
of Stenography. Its use necessitated a special course of study
and there is still much uncertainty as to the significance of
the characters employed.
It is when we come to consider the subject of inscriptions cut
in stone that we find the most frequent use of abbreviations. At
certain late periods for example, in Spain in the Middle Ages
this custom becomes abused to such an extent as to result in the
invention of symbols which are undecipherable. In the best
period of epigraphy certain rules are strictly observed. The
abbreviations in common use fall under two chief heads:
+ The reduction of the word to its initial letter;
+ The reduction of a word to its first letters in a bunch or to
several letters taken at intervals in the body a the word and
set side by aide.
This latter arrangement is almost conclusively Christian,
whereas in heathen inscriptions the number of letters left in
the abbreviation is more or less limited, yet no intermediate
letter is omitted. The following readings may be noted: PON.,
PONT., PONTF., for Pontifex; DP., DEP., DPS., for Depositus; MCP
for Municipii. Occasionally a phrase which has become stale by
constant use and has grown into a formula, is rarely found in
any other form than that of its abbreviation e.g. D.M. for Diis
Manibus, IHS for Jesus, just as we have kept R.I.P. for
requiescat in pace. Lastly a whole epitaph is often met with on
tombs where the husband's epitaph to his wife takes the
following form: DE qua N(ullum) D(olorem) A(cceperat) N(isi)
M(ortis).
Another form of Abbreviation consisted in doubling the last
consonant of the word to be shortened as many times as there
were persons alluded to, e.g. AVG for Augustus, AVGG for Augusti
duo. Stone cutters however, soon began to take liberties with
this rule, and, instead of Putting COSS for Consulibus duobus,
invented the form CCSS. Still, when there was occasion to refer
to three or four people this doubling of the last consonant gave
way of necessity, in abbreviations, to the simple sign of the
plural. A horizontal line over a letter or set of letters was
also much used, and was destined indeed, to become almost
universal in the Middle Ages. There is never any difficulty in
settling the date of monuments where this sign of abbreviation
occurs; the undulating line, or one curved at each end and
rising in the middle only came into use at a comparatively late
period.
Certain marks of Abbreviation have had so widespread a use as to
merit special note. The ancient liturgical manuscripts which
contain recensions of Masses, and are known as Sacramentaries
all have the letters VD at the beginning of the Preface, set
side by side and joined by a transverse bar. Mabillon interprets
this monogram as being that of the formula, "Vere dignum et
justum est, aequum et salutare", an interpretation which is
certainly the correct one. According to the various manuscripts,
the monogram stands for the words vere dignum, or else for the
whole formula; in the majority of instances the letters VD stand
for the phrase Vere dignum et Justum est, which is followed by
the rest of the context, oequum et, etc. In a large number of
manuscripts these letters VD have fired the imagination of
illuminators And copyists. It is however, impossible to enter
into a general description of the subject. Under a growth of
arabesques of foliage, of fancies of all kinds the outline of
the two letters is sometimes hard to distinguish. The symbol
encroaches more and more, and grows from a mere initial into an
ornamental page. The essential type varies little, though
variants of some importance are met with. It was inevitable that
medieval writers should build a whole system of mysticism and
allegory on the VD of the Preface. John Beleth rector of the
theological school at Pads, devised an interpretation which
found acceptance. The D, he wrote, a letter completely closed,
signifies the Godhead, Which has neither beginning nor end; the
half open V means the Manhood of Christ, which had a beginning,
but has no end; the bar which intersects the upright lines of
the VD and forms a cross, teaches us that the cross makes us fit
for the life of God. Fancies of the same kind are to be found in
Sicardus of Cremona and in Durandus of Mende. Various
manuscripts contain hundreds of variable prefaces; the initial
letters however are not drawn on a uniform pattern and tie chief
attempts at ornamentation are invariably confined to the
Praefatio Communis immediately preceding the Canon of the Mass.
The first two letters of the Canon TE have also been made the
theme of various decorations, though less curious and less
varied than those above referred to.
A word may be said concerning the abbreviation D.O.M., sometimes
seen over the doors of our churches and which whatever may be
said to the contrary, has never been a Christian symbol. The
formula in full is Deo Optimo Maximo and referred originally
Jupiter. The abbreviation, IHV, is found on a great number of
different objects: ancient gems, coins, epitaphs, dedications
and diplomas. The symbol IHS was destined to endure for many
ages, but it is only since the time of St. Bernardine of Sienna
that it has come into such widespread use. It is impossible,
with the information available, to say whether it is of Greek or
Latin origin. Lastly, the abbreviation, XM(GAMMA), meaning,
Christon Maria genna is often found on monuments of eastern
origin.
LECLERCQ, in Dict. d arch ol. chr t. et de liturgie, I, 155-183,
s.v.; MURATORI, Novus thesaurus veterum inscriptionum (Milan,
1739); DE ROSSI, Inscr. christ. urb. Romae (Rome, 1861);
DUCHESNE, Origines du culte chr tien (Paris, 1898); ZELL,
Handbuch der r mischen Epigraphik, 1850-57.
H. LECLERCQ
Ecclesiastical Abbreviations
Ecclesiastical Abbreviations
The words most commonly abbreviated at all times are proper
names, titles (official or customary), of persons or
corporations, and words of frequent occurrence. A good list of
those used in Roman Republican and early Imperial times may be
seen in Egbert's Latin Inscriptions (New York, 1896), 417-459.
The Jewish scribes and Talmudic scholars also had frequent
recourse to abbreviations.
Between the seventh and ninth centuries the ancient Roman system
of abbreviations gave way to a more difficult one that gradually
grew up in the monastic houses and in the chanceries of the new
Teutonic kingdoms. Merovingian, Lombard, and Anglo-Saxon scripts
offer each their own abbreviations, not to speak of the unique
scotica manus or libri scottice scripti (Irish hand, or books
written in the medieval Irish hand). Eventually such productive
centres of technical manuscripts as the Papal Chancery, the
theological schools of Paris and Oxford, and the civil-law
school of Bologna set the standards of abbreviations for all
Europe. The medieval manuscripts abound in abbreviations, owing
in part to the abandonment of the uncial, or quasi-uncial, and
the almost universal use of the cursive, hand. The medieval
writer inherited a few from Christian antiquity; others he
invented or adapted, in order to save time and parchment. They
are found especially in manuscripts of scholastic theology and
canon law, annals and chronicles, the Roman law, and in
administrative documents, civil and privileges, bulls,
rescripts). They multiplied with time, and were never so
numerous as on the eve of the discovery of printing; many of the
early printed books offer this peculiarity, together with other
characteristics of the manuscript page. The development of
printing brought about the abandonment of many abbreviations,
while it suggested and introduced new ones a process also
favoured by the growth of ecclesiastical legislation, the
creation of new offices, etc. There was less medieval
abbreviation in the text of books much used on public occasions,
e.g. missals, antiphonaries, bibles; in one way or another the
needs of students seem to have been the chief cause of the
majority of medieval abbreviations. The means of abbreviation
were usually full points or dots (mostly in Roman antiquity),
the semicolon (eventually conventionalized), lines (horizontal,
perpendicular, oblong, wavy curves, and commas). Vowel-sounds
were frequently written not after, but over, the consonants.
Certain letters, like p and q, that occur with extreme.
frequency, e.g. in prepositions and terminations, became the
source of many peculiar abbreviations; similarly, frequently
recurring words like et (and), est (is).
Habit and convenience are today the principal motives for using
abbreviations. Most of those in actual use fall under one or
other of the following heads:
I. Administrative;
II. Liturgical;
III. Scholastic;
IV. Chronological.
I. The first class of abbreviations includes those used in the
composition of Pontifical documents. They were once very
numerous, and lists of them may be seen in the works quoted
below (e.g. Quantin, Prou). It may be well to state at once that
since 29 December, 1878, by order of Leo XIII, the great papal
documents ( Litterae Apostolicae) are no longer written in the
old Gothic hand known as bollatico; all abbreviations, with the
exception of a few obvious ones, like S.R.E., were abolished by
the same authority (Acta S. Sedis, XI, 465-467). In the
transaction of ordinary business the Roman Congregations are
wont to use certain brief and pithy formulas (e.g. Negative =
"No"; Negative et amplius = "No with emphasis"). They are not,
correctly speaking, abbreviations. For a list of these see CANON
LAW. This class includes also the abbreviations for the names of
most sees. The full Latin titles of all existing (Latin)
dioceses may be seen in the Roman annual, "Gerarchia Cattolica",
a complete list of the Latin names of all known dioceses (extant
or extinct) is found in the large folio work of the Comte de Mas
Latrie, "Tresor de chronologie, d'histoire et de geographie"
(Paris, 1884). For the same purpose the reader may also consult
the episcopal catalogues of the Benedictine Gams, "Series
Episcoporum Ecclesiae Catholicae" (Ratisbon, 1873-86), and the
Franciscan Conrad Eubel, "Hierarchia Catholica Medii AEvi"
(Muenster, 1898-1902). Under this general heading may be
included all abbreviated forms of addresses in ordinary
intercourse, whether of individuals or of members of religious
orders, congregations, institutes, to which may be added the
forms of addresses usual for members of Catholic lay societies
and the Papal orders of merit. (See CATHOLIC SOCIETIES, ORDERS
OF MERIT.) The abbreviations of the titles of Roman
Congregations, and of the individual canonical ecclesiastical
authorities, belong also to this class.
II. A second class of abbreviations includes those used in the
description of liturgical acts or the directions for their
performance, e.g. the Holy Mass. the Divine Office (Breviary),
the ecclesiastical devotions, etc. Here may also be classed the
abbreviated forms for the name of God, Jesus Christ, and the
Holy Ghost; also for the names of the Blessed Virgin, the
saints, etc.; likewise abbreviations used in the administration
of the Sacraments, mortuary epitaphs, etc. (to which class
belong the numerous Catacomb inscriptions); finally some
miscellaneous abbreviations like those used in the publication
of documents concerning beatification and canonization.
III. In the third class belong scholastic abbreviations, used to
designate honorific titles acquired in the schools, to avoid the
repetition of lengthy titles of books and reviews, or to
facilitate reference to ecclesiastical and civil legislation.
IV. In the fourth class of abbreviations belong all such as are
used to describe the elements of the year, civil or
ecclesiastical.
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN APOSTOLIC RESCRIPTS
Absoluo. -- Absolutio ("Absolution")
Alr. -- Aliter ("Otherwise")
Aplica. -- Apostolica ("Apostolic")
Appatis. -- Approbatis ("Having been approved")
Archiepus. -- Archiepiscopus ("Archbishop")
Aucte. -- Auctoritate ("By the Authority")
Canice. -- Canonice ("Canonically")
Card. -- Cardinalis ("Cardinal")
Cens. -- Censuris ("Censures" -- abl. or dat. case)
Circumpeone. -- Circumspectione ("Circumspection" -- abl. case)
Coione. -- Communione ("Communion" -- abl. case)
Confeone. -- Confessione ("Confession" -- abl. case)
Consciae. -- Conscientiae ("Of [or to] conscience")
Constbus -- Constitutionibus ("Constitutions" -- abl. or dat.
case)
Discreoni. -- Discretioni ("To the Discretion")
Dispensao. -- Dispensatio ("Dispensation")
Dnus -- Dominus ("Lord", "Sir", or "Mr.")
Ecclae. -- Ecclesiae ("Of [or to] the Church")
Ecclis. -- Ecclesiasticis ("Ecclesiastical")
Effum. -- Effectum ("Effect")
Epus. -- Episcopus ("Bishop")
Excoe. -- Excommunicatione ("Excommunication" -- abl. case)
Exit. -- Existit ("Exists")
Fr. -- Frater ("Brother")
Frum. -- Fratrum ("Of the Brothers")
Gnalis -- Generalis ("General")
Humil. -- Humiliter ("Humbly")
Humoi. -- Hujusmodi ("Of this kind")
Igr. -- Igitur ("Therefore")
Infraptum. -- Infrascriptum ("Written below")
Intropta. -- Introscripta ("Written within")
Irregulte. -- Irregularitate ("Irregularity" -- abl. case)
Lia. -- Licentia ("License")
Litma. -- Legitima ("Lawful")
Lre. -- Litterae ("Letters")
Lte. -- Licite ("Lawfully", or "licitly")
Magro. -- Magistro ("Master" -- dat. or abl. case)
Mir. -- Misericorditer ("Mercifully")
Miraone. -- Miseratione ("Pity" -- abl. case)
Mrimonium. -- Matrimonium ("Matrimony")
Nultus. -- Nullatenus ("Nowise")
Ordinaoni. -- Ordinationi ("Ordination" -- dat. case)
Ordio. -- Ordinario ("Ordinary" -- dat. or abl. case)
Pbr. -- Presbyter ("Priest")
Penia. -- Poenitentia ("Penance", or "repentance")
Peniaria. -- Poenitentiaria ("Penitentiary"; i.e. Bureau of the
Apostolic Penitentiary)
Pntium. -- Praesentium ("Of those present", or, "Of this present
writing")
Poe. -- Posse ("To be able", or, "The ability to do a thing")
Pontus. -- Pontificatus ("Pontificate")
PP. -- Papa ("Pope")
Pr. -- Pater ("Father")
Pror. -- Procurator
Ptur. -- Praefertur ("Is preferred", or, "Is brought forward")
Ptus. -- Praefatus ("Aforesaid")
Qd. -- Quod ("Because", "That", or, "Which")
Qmlbt. -- Quomodolibet ("In any manner whatsoever")
Qtnus. -- Quatenus ("In so far as")
Relione. -- Religione ("Religion", or, "Religious Order" -- abl.
case)
Rlari. -- Regulari ("Regular")
Roma. -- Romana ("Roman")
Salri. -- Salutari ("Salutary")
Snia. -- Sententia ("Opinion")
Sntae., Stae. -- Sanctae ("Holy", or, "Saints" -- feminine)
Spealer. Specialiter ("Specially")
Spualibus Spiritualibus ("In spiritual matters")
Supplioni. Supplicationibus ("Supplication" -- dat. or abl.
case)
Thia, Theolia. Theologia ("Theology")
Tli. Tituli ("Titles")
Tm. -- Tantum ("So much", or, "Only")
Tn. -- Tamen ("Nevertheless")
Venebli -- Venerabili ("Venerable")
Vrae. -- Vestrae ("Your")
ABBREVIATIONS IN GENERAL USE, CHIEFLY ECCLESIASTICAL
A.B. -- Artium Baccalaureus ("Bachelor of Arts")
Ab. -- Abbas ("Abbot")
Abp. -- Archbishop
Abs. -- Absens ("Absent")
A.C. -- Auditor Camerae (Auditor of the Papal Treasury)
AC -- Ante Christum ("Before Christ")
ACN -- Ante Christum Natum ("Before the Birth of Christ")
A.D. -- Anno Domini ("Year of Our Lord")
a.d. -- ante diem ("The day before")
Adm. Rev. -- Admodum Reverendus ("Very Reverend")
Adv. -- Adventus ("Advent")
Alb. -- Albus ("White" -- Breviary)
al. -- alii, alibi, alias ("others", "elsewhere", "otherwise")
A.M. -- Anno Mundi ("Year of the World")
A.M. -- Artium Magister ("Master of Arts")
A.M.D.G. -- Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam ("For the greater glory of
God")
An. -- Annus ("Year")
Ann. -- Anni ("Years")
Ana, Ant. -- Antiphon
Apost. -- Apostolus ("Apostle")
Ap. Sed. -- Apostolica Sedes ("Apostolic See")
Ap. Sed. Leg. -- Apostolicae Sedis Legatus ("Legate of the
Apostolic See")
Archiep. -- Archiepiscopus ("Archbishop")
Archid. -- Archidiaconus ("Archdeacon")
Archiprb. -- Archipresbyter ("Archpriest")
A.R.S. -- Anno Reparatae Salutis ("In the year of Our
Redemption")
A.U. -- Alma Urbs ("Beloved City" -- i.e., Rome)
Authen. -- Authentica ("Authentic" -- e.g. letters)
Aux. -- Auxilium, Auxilio ("Help", "With the help of")
B.A. -- Baccalaureus Artium ("Bachelor of Arts")
B. BB. -- Beatus, Beati ("Blessed")
B.C. -- Before Christ
B.C.L. -- Baccalaureus Civilis [or Canonicae] Legis ("Bachelor
of Civil [or Canon] Law")
B.D. -- Bachelor of Divinity
B.F. -- Bona Fide ("In Good Faith")
Ben. -- Benedictio ("Blessing")
Benevol. -- Benevolentia ("Benevolence")
Bon. Mem. -- Bonae Memoriae ("Of Happy Memory")
B.P. -- Beatissime Pater ("Most Holy Father")
Bro. -- Brother
B. Se. -- Baccalaureus Scientiarum ("Bachelor of Sciences")
B.U.J. -- Baccalaureus Utriusque Juris ("Bachelor of Both Laws"
-- i.e., civil and canon)
B.T. -- Baccalaureus Theologiae ("Bachelor of Theology")
B.V. -- Beatitudo Vestra ("Your Holiness")
B.V. -- Beata Virgo ("Blessed Virgin")
B.V.M. -- Beata Virgo Maria ("Blessed Virgin Mary")
Cam. -- Camera (Papal Treasury)
Cam. Ap. -- Camera Apostolica ("Apostolic Camera" -- i.e. Papal
Treasury)
Can. -- Canonicus
Cane. -- Cancellarius ("Chancellor")
Cap. -- Capitulum ("Little Chapter" -- Breviary)
Cap. de seq. -- Capitulum de Sequenti ("Little chapter of the
following feast" -- Breviary)
Capel. -- Capella ("Chapel")
Caus. -- Causa ("Cause")
C.C. -- Curatus ("Curate" -- used chiefly in Ireland)
CC. VV. -- Clarissimi Viri ("Illustrious Men")
Cen. Eccl. -- Censura Ecclesiastica ("Ecclesiastical Censure")
Cla. -- Clausula ("Clause")
Cl., Clico. -- Clericus, Clerico ("Cleric")
Clun. -- Cluniacenses ("Monks of Cluny")
C.M. -- Causa Mortis ("On occasion of death")
Cod. -- Codex (Manuscript)
Cog. Leg. -- Cognatio Legalis ("Legal Cognation")
Cog. Spir. -- Cognatio Spiritualis ("Spiritual Cognation")
Coll. Cone. -- Collectio Conciliorum ("Collection of the
Councils")
Comm. Prec. -- Commemoratio Praecedentis ("Commemoration of the
preceding feast" -- Breviary)
Comm. Seq. -- Commemoratio Sequentis ("Commemoration of the
following feast" -- Breviary)
Compl. -- Completorium ("Compline" -- Breviary)
Con. -- Contra ("against")
Cone. -- Concilium ("Council")
Conf. -- Confessor
Conf. Doct. -- Confessor et Doctor (Breviary)
Conf. Pont. -- Confessor Pontifex ("Confessor and Bishop" --
Breviary)
Cons. -- Consecratio ("Consecration")
Consecr. -- Consecratus ("Consecrated")
Const. Ap. -- Constitutio Apostolica ("Apostolic Constitution")
Cr. -- Credo ("Creed" -- Breviary)
D. -- Dominus ("Lord")
d. -- dies ("day")
D.C.L. -- Doctor Civilis [or Canonicae] Legis ("Doctor of Civil
[or Canon] Law")
D.D. -- Doctores ("Doctors")
D.D. -- Donum dedit; Dedicavit ("Gave", "dedicated")
D.D. -- Doctor Divinitatis ("Doctor of Divinity" -- i.e.
Theology)
Dec. -- Decanus ("Dean")
Def. -- Defunctus ("Deceased")
D.G. -- Dei Gratia ("By the Grace of God")
D.N. -- Dominus Noster ("Our Lord")
D.N.J.C. -- Dominus Noster Jesus Christus ("Our Lord Jesus
Christ")
DN, DNS, DNUS -- Dominus ("Lord")
Doct. -- Doctor (Breviary)
Dom. -- Dominica ("Sunday")
D.O.M. -- Deo Optimo Maximo ("To God, the Best and Greatest")
Doxol. -- Doxologia ("Doxology" -- Breviary)
D.R. -- Decanus Ruralis ("Rural Dean")
DS -- Deus ("God")
D.Se. -- Doctor Scientiarum ("Doctor of Sciences")
D.V. -- Deo Volente ("God willing")
Dupl. -- Duplex ("Double feast" -- Breviary)
Dupl. Maj. -- Duplex Major ("Double Major feast")
Dupl. I. Cl. -- Duplex Primae Classis ("Double First Class
feast" -- Breviary)
Dupl. II. Cl. -- Duplex Secundae Classis ("Double Second Class
feast" -- Breviary)
Eccl. -- Ecclesiasticus ("Ecclesiastic")
E., Eccl. -- Ecclesia ("The Church")
El. -- Electio, Electus ("Election", "Elect")
Emus -- Eminentissimus ("Most Eminent")
EPS, EP., Episc. -- Episcopus ("Bishop")
Et. -- Etiam ("Also, Even")
Evang. -- Evangelium ("Gospel" -- Breviary)
Ex. -- Extra ("Outside of")
Exe. -- Excommunicatus, Excommunicatio ("Excommunicated,
Excommunication")
Fel. Mem. -- Felicis Memoriae ("Of Happy Memory")
Fel. Rec. -- Felicis Recordationis ("Of Happy Memory")
Fer. -- Feria ("Weekday")
Fr., F. -- Frater, Frere ("Brother")
Fund. -- Fundatio ("Foundation")
Gen. -- Generalis ("General")
Gl. -- Gloria ("Glory to God", etc.)
Gr. -- Gratia ("Grace")
Grad. -- Gradus ("Grade")
Grat. -- Gratias ("Thanks"); or Gratis ("Without expense")
hebd. -- Hebdomada ("Week")
Hom. -- Homilia ("Homily" -- Breviary)
hor. -- hora ("hour")
IC -- Jesus (first and third letters of His name in Greek)
Id. -- Idus ("Ides")
Igr. -- Igitur ("Therefore")
I.H.S. -- Iesus Hominum Salvator ("Jesus Saviour of Men" --
usual interpretation). Really a faulty Latin transliteration of
the first three letters of JESUS in Greek (IHS for IHC).
Ind. -- Indictio ("Indiction")
Ind. -- Index
Inq. -- Inquisitio ("Inquisition")
i.p.i. -- in partibus infidelium ("among the infidels")
Is. -- Idus ("Ides")
J.C. -- Jesus Christus ("Jesus Christ")
J.C.D. -- Juris Canonici Doctor, Juris Civilis Doctor ("Doctor
of Canon Law", "Doctor of Civil Law")
J.D. -- Juris Doctor ("Doctor of Law")
J.M.J. -- Jesus, Maria, Joseph ("Jesus, Mary, Joseph")
Jo., Joann. -- Joannes ("John")
J.U.D. -- Juris Utriusque Doctor ("Doctor of Both Laws" -- Civil
and Canon)
Jud. -- Judicium ("Judgment")
J.U.L. -- Juris Utriusque Licentiatus ("Licentiate of Both
Laws")
Jur. -- Juris ("Of Law")
Kal. -- Kalendae ("Calends")
Laic. -- Laicus ("Layman")
Laud. -- Laudes ("Lauds" -- Breviary)
L.C.D. -- Legis Civilis Doctor ("Doctor of Civil Law")
l.c.; loc. cit. -- Loco citato ("at the place already cited")
Lect. -- Lectio ("Lesson")
Legit. -- Legitime, Legitimus ("Legally", "legitimate")
L.H.D. -- Litterarum Humaniorum Doctor ("Doctor of Literature")
Lib., Lo. -- Liber, Libro ("Book", "In the book")
Lic. -- Licentia, Licentiatus ("License", "Licentiate")
Litt. -- Littera ("Letter")
LL.B. -- Legum Baccalaureus ("Bachelor of Laws")
LL.D. -- Legum Doctor ("Doctor of Laws")
LL.M. -- Legum Magister ("Master of Laws")
Loc. -- Locus ("Place")
Lov. -- Lovanium ("Louvain")
Lovan. -- Lovanienses (Theologians of Louvain)
L.S. -- Loco Sigilli ("Place of the Seal")
Lud. -- Ludovicus
M. -- Maria ("Mary")
M.A. -- Magister Artium ("Master of Arts")
Mag. -- Magister ("Master")
Mand. -- Mandamus ("We command")
Mand. Ap. -- Mandatum Apostolicum ("Apostolic Mandate", e.g. for
a bishop's consecration)
Mart., M., MM. -- Martyr, Martyres ("Martyr", "Martyrs" --
Breviary)
Mat. -- Matutinum ("Matins" -- Breviary)
Matr. -- Matrimonum ("Marriage")
Mgr. -- Monseigneur, Monsignore ("My Lord")
Miss. -- Missa ("Mass" -- Breviary); Missionarius ("Missionary")
Miss. Apost., M.A. -- Missionarius Apostolicus ("Missionary
Apostolic")
M.R. -- Missionarius Rector ("Missionary Rector")
m.t.v. -- mutatur terminatio versiculi ("the termination of the
little verse is changed" -- Breviary)
Nativ., D.N.J.C. -- Nativitas Domini Nostri Jesu Christi
("Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ")
N. D. -- Nostra Domina, Notre Dame ("Our Lady")
Nigr. -- Niger ("Black" -- Breviary)
No. -- Nobis ("to us", "for us")
Nob. -- Nobilis, Nobiles ("Noble", "Nobles")
Noct. -- Nocturnum ("Nocturn")
Non. -- Nonae ("Nones")
Nostr. -- Noster, nostri ("Our", "of our")
Not. -- Notitia ("Knowledge")
N.S. -- Notre Seigneur, Nostro Signore ("Our Lord")
N.S. -- New Style
N.T. -- Novum Testamentum ("New Testament")
Ntri. -- Nostri ("Of our")
Nup. -- Nuptiae ("Nuptials")
Ob. -- Obiit ("Died")
Oct. -- Octava ("Octave" -- Breviary)
Omn. -- Omnes, Omnibus ("All", "to all")
Op. Cit. -- Opere Citato ("In the work cited")
Or. -- Oratio ("Prayer" -- Breviary)
Ord. -- Ordo, Ordinatio, Ordinarius ("Order", "Ordination",
"Ordinary")
Or. Orat. -- Orator ("Petitioner"), Oratorium ("Oratory")
O.S. -- Old Style
O.T. -- Old Testament
Oxon. -- Oxonium, Oxonienses ("Oxford", "Theologians or Scholars
of Oxford")
P. -- Pater, Pere ("Father")
Pa. -- Papa ("Pope"); Pater ("Father")
Pact. -- Pactum ("Agreement")
Pasch. -- Pascha ("Easter" -- Breviary)
Patr. -- Patriarcha ("Patriarch")
Pent. -- Pentecostes ("Pentecost" -- Breviary)
Ph.B. -- Philosophiae Baccalaureus ("Bachelor of Philosophy")
Ph.D. -- Philosophiae Doctor ("Doctor of Philosophy")
Phil. -- Philosophia ("Philosophy")
Ph.M. -- Philosophiae Magister ("Master of Philosophy")
P.K. -- Pridie Kalendas ("The day before the Calends")
Poenit. -- Poenitentia ("Penance")
Poenit Ap. -- Poenitentiaria Apostolica ("Office of the
Apostolic Penitentiary")
Pont. -- Pontifex ("Pontiff", i.e. Bishop -- Breviary)
Pont. -- Pontificatus ("Pontificate")
Pont. Max. -- Pontifex Maximus ("Supreme Pontiff")
Poss. -- Possessor, Possessio ("Possessor", "Possession")
PP. -- Papa ("Pope"); Pontificum ("Of the popes")
P.P. -- Parochus ("Parish Priest" -- used mostly in Ireland)
PP. AA. -- Patres Amplissimi ("Cardinals")
P.P.P. -- Propria Pecunia Posuit ("Erected at his own expense")
P.R. -- Permanens Rector ("Permanent Rector")
Praef. -- Praefatio ("Preface" of the Mass -- Breviary)
Presbit. -- Presbyter, Priest
Prof. -- Professus, Professio, Professor ("Professed",
"Profession", "Professor")
Prop. Fid. -- Propaganda Fide (Congregation of the Propaganda,
Rome)
Propr. -- Proprium ("Proper" -- Breviary)
Prov. -- Provisio, Provisum ("Provision", "Provided")
Ps. -- Psalmus ("Psalm")
Pub., Publ. -- Publicus, Publice ("Public", "Publicly")
Purg. Can. -- Purgatio Canonica ("Canonical Disculpation")
Quadrag. -- Quadragesima ("Lent", also the "Fortieth day" before
Easter -- Breviary)
Quinquag. -- Quinquagesima (The "Fiftieth day" before Easter --
Breviary)
R. -- Responsorium ("Responsory" -- Breviary)
R. -- Roma (Rome)
Rescr. -- Rescriptum ("Rescript")
R.D. -- Rural Dean
Req. -- Requiescat ("May he [or she] rest", i.e. in peace)
Resp. -- Responsum ("Reply")
R.I.P. -- Requiescat In Pace ("May he or she rest in peace")
Rit. -- Ritus ("Rite", "Rites")
Rom. -- Romanus, Romana ("Roman")
R. P. -- Reverendus Pater, Reverend Pere ("Reverend Father")
RR. -- Rerum ("Of Things, Subjects" -- e.g. SS. RR. Ital.,
Writers on Italian [historical] subjects); Regesta
Rt. Rev. -- Right Reverend
Rub. -- Ruber ("Red" -- Breviary)
Rubr. -- Rubrica ("Rubric")
S., Sacr. -- Sacrum ("Sacred")
Sab., Sabb. -- Sabbatum ("Sabbath", Saturday)
Saec. -- Saeculum (Century)
Sal. -- Salus, Salutis ("Salvation", "of Salvation")
Salmant. -- Salmanticenses (Theologians of Salamanca)
S.C. -- Sacra Congregatio ("Sacred Congregation")
S.C.C. -- Sacra Congregatio Concilii ("Sacred Congregation of
the Council", i.e. of Trent)
S.C.EE.RR. -- Sacra Congregatio Episcoporum et Regularium
("Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars")
S.C.I. -- Sacra Congregatio Indicis ("Sacred Congregation of the
Index")
S.C.P.F. -- Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide ("Sacred
Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith")
SCS -- Sanctus ("Saint")
s.d. -- sine data (undated book)
S.D. -- Servus Dei (Servant of God)
Semid. -- Semiduplex ("Semi" double feast -- Breviary)
Septuag -- Septuagesima ("Seventieth day" before Easter; always
a Sunday -- Breviary)
Sexag. -- Sexagesima ("Sixtieth day" before Easter -- Breviary)
Sig. -- Sigillum ("Seal")
Simpl. -- Simplex ("Simple" feast -- Breviary)
Sine Com. -- Sine Commemoratione ("Without commemoration" of
other feast, or feasts -- Breviary)
s.l. -- sine loco ("without indication" of place of printing)
s.l.n.d. -- sine loco nec data ("without indication of place" or
"without date of printing")
S.M. -- Sanctae Memoriae ("Of Holy Memory")
Soc. -- Socius, Socii ("Companion", "Companions" -- Breviary)
S. Off. -- Sanctum Officium (Congregation of the Holy Office,
Inquisition)
S.P. -- Sanctissime Pater ("Most Holy Father")
S.P., S. Petr. -- Sanctus Petrus ("St. Peter")
S.P. -- Summus Pontifex ("Supreme Pontiff", Pope)
S.P.A. -- Sacrum Palatium Apostolicum ("Sacred Apostolic
Palace", Vatican, Quirinal)
Sr. -- Sister
S.R.C. -- Sacra Rituum Congregatio ("Sacred Congregation of
Rites")
S.R.E. -- Sancta Romana Ecclesia, Sanctae Romanae Ecclesia
("Most Holy Roman Church"; or, "of the Most Holy Roman Church")
SS. -- Scriptores ("Writers")
SS.D.N. -- Sanctissimus Dominus Noster ("Our Most Holy Lord
[Jesus Christ]", also a title of the Pope)
S., SS. -- Sanctus, Sancti ("Saint", "Saints")
S.T.B. -- Sacrae Theologiae Baccalaureus ("Bachelor of Sacred
Theology")
S.T.D. -- Sacred Theologiae Doctor ("Doctor of Sacred Theology")
S.T.L. -- Sacrae Theologiae Licentiatus ("Licentiate of Sacred
Theology")
Suffr. -- Suffragia ("Suffrages" -- i.e. prayers of the saints;
Breviary)
S.V. -- Sanctitas Vestra ("Your Holiness")
Syn. -- Synodus ("Synod")
Temp. -- Tempus, Tempore ("Time", "in time")
Test. -- Testes, Testimonium ("Witnesses", "Testimony")
Theol. -- Theologia ("Theology")
Tit. -- Titulus, Tituli ("Title", "Titles")
Ult. -- Ultimo ("Last" -- day, month, year)
Usq. -- Usque ("As far as")
Ux. -- Uxor ("Wife")
V., Ven., VV. -- Venerabilis, Venerabiles ("Venerable")
V., Vest. -- Vester ("Your")
Vac. -- Vacat, Vacans ("Vacant")
Val. -- Valor ("Value")
Vat. -- Vaticanus ("Vatican")
Vba. -- Verba ("Words")
Vers. -- Versiculus ("Versicle" -- Breviary)
Vesp. -- Vesperae ("Vespers" -- Breviary)
V.F., Vic. For. -- Vicarius Foraneus ("Vicar-Forane")
V.G. -- Vicarius Generalis ("Vicar-General")
Vid. -- Vidua ("Widow" -- Breviary)
Vid., Videl. -- Videlicet ("Namely")
Vig. -- Vigilia ("Vigil" of a feast -- Breviary)
Viol. -- Violaceus ("Violet" -- Breviary)
Virg. -- Virgo ("Virgin" -- Breviary)
Virid. -- Viridis ("Green" -- Breviary)
V.M. -- Vir Magnificus ("Great Man")
V. Rev. -- Very Reverend
V.T. -- Vetus Testamentum
XC., XCS. -- Christus ("Christ" -- first, middle, and last
letters of the Greek name)
ABBREVIATIONS IN CATACOMB INSCRIPTIONS
A.D. -- Ante Diem (e.g. in the phrase, "Ante Diem VI [or Sextum]
Kal. Apriles", is equivalent to the sixth day before the Calends
of April, counting both the Calends and the day intended to be
indicated); or Anima Dulcis ("Sweet Soul")
A.Q.I.C. -- Anima Quiescat In Christo ("May his [or her] Soul
Repose in Christ")
B., BMT. -- Bene Merenti ("To the Well-Deserving")
B.M. -- Bonae Memoriae ("Of Happy Memory")
B.F. -- Bonae Feminae ("To the Good Woman")
I.C. -- Bibas [for Vivas] In Christo ("May you Live In Christ")
B.M.F. -- Bene Merenti Fecit ("He erected this to the
Well-Deserving")
B.Q. -- Bene Quiescat ("May he [or she] Rest Well")
C. -- Consul
CC. -- Consules ("Consuls")
C.F. -- Clarissima Femina ("Most Illustrious Woman")
Cl. V. -- Clarissimus Vir ("Most Illustrious Man")
C.O. -- Conjugi Optimo ("To my Excellent Husband")
C.O.B.Q. -- Cum Omnibus Bonis Quiescat ("May he [or she] Repose
With All Good souls")
COI. -- Conjugi ("To my Husband [or Wife]")
CS., COS. -- Consul
COSS. -- Consules ("Consuls")
C.P. -- Clarissima Puella ("Most Illustrious Maiden")
D. -- Depositus ("Laid to rest"); or Dulcis ("Dear One")
D.D. -- Dedit, Dedicavit ("Gave", "Dedicated")
DEP. -- Depositus ("Laid to rest")
D.I.P. -- Dormit In Pace ("Sleeps in Peace")
D.M. -- Diis Manibus ("To the Manes [of]")
D.M.S. -- Diis Manibus Sacrum ("Sacred to the Manes [of]")
D.N. -- Domino Nostro ("To Our Lord")
DD. NN. -- Dominis Nostris ("To Our Lords")
E.V. -- Ex Voto ("In Fulfilment of a Vow")
EX. TM. -- Ex Testamento ("In accordance with the Testament of")
E VIV. DISC. -- E Vivis Discessit ("Departed from Life")
F. -- Fecit ("Did"); or Filius ("Son"); or Feliciter ("Happily")
F.C. -- Fieri Curavit ("Caused to be made")
F.F. -- Fieri Fecit ("Caused to be made")
FF. -- Fratres ("Brothers"); Filii ("Sons")
FS. -- Fossor ("Digger")
H. -- Haeres ("Heir"); Hic ("Here")
H.L.S. -- Hoc Loco Situs ("Laid [or Put] in This Place")
H.M.F.F. -- Hoc Monumentum Fieri Fecit ("Caused This Monument to
be Made")
H.S. -- Hic Situs ("Laid Here")
ID. -- Idibus ("On the Ides")
IDNE. -- Indictione ("In the Indiction" -- a chronological term)
I.L.H. -- Jus Liberorum Habens ("Possessing the Right of
Children" -- i.e., eligibility to public office under age)
INB. -- In Bono ("In Good [odour]")
IND. -- Same as IDNE
INP -- In Pace ("In Peace")
I.X. -- In Christo ("In Christ")
K. -- Kalendas ("Calends"); or Care, Carus, Cara ("Dear One");
or Carissimus[a] ("Dearest")
K.B.M. -- Karissimo Bene Merenti ("To the Most Dear and
Well-deserving")
L. -- Locus ("Place")
L.M. -- Locus Monumenti ("Place of the Monument")
L.S. -- Locus Selpuchri ("Place of the Sepulchre")
M. -- Martyr, or Memoria ("Memory") or Monumentum ("Monument")
MM. -- Martyres ("Martyrs")
M.P. -- Monumentum Posuit ("Erected a Monument")
MRT. -- Merenti ("To the Deserving")
N. -- Nonas ("Nones"); or Numero ("Number")
NN. -- Nostris ("To Our" -- with a plural) or Numeri ("Numbers")
O. -- Hora ("Hour"); Obiit ("Died")
OB. IN XTO. -- Obiit In Christo ("Died In Christ")
OMS. -- Omnes ("All")
OP. -- Optimus (Excellent, or Supremely Good)
P. -- Pax ("Peace"); or Pius ("Dutiful"); or Ponendum ("To be
Placed"); or Pridie ("The Day Before"); or Plus ("More")
P.C. -- Poni Curavit ("Caused to be Placed")
P.C., P. CONS. -- Post Consulatum ("After the Consulate")
P.I. -- Poni Jussit ("Ordered to be Placed")
P.M. -- Plus Minus ("More or Less"); or Piae Memoriae ("Of Pious
Memory"); or Post Mortem ("After Death")
PP. -- Praepositus ("Placed over")
PR.K. -- Pridie Kalendas ("The Day Before the Calends")
PRB. -- Presbyter ("Priest")
PR.N. -- Pridie Nonas ("The Day Before the Nones")
P.T.C.S. -- Pax Tibi Cum Sanctis ("Peace to Thee With the
Saints")
PZ. -- Pie Zeses ("May you Live Piously" -- Greek)
Q., Qui. -- Quiescit ("He Rests")
Q.B.AN. -- Qui Bixit [for Vixit] Annos ("Who lived . . . years")
Q.I.P. -- Quiescat In Pace ("May he [or she] Rest in Peace")
Q.V. -- Qui Vixit ("Who Lived")
R. -- Requiescit ("He Rests"); or Refrigerio ("In [a place of]
Refreshment")
Reg. -- Regionis ("Of the Region")
S. -- Suus ("His"); or Situs ("Placed"); or Sepulchrum
("Sepulchre")
SC. M. -- Sanctae Memoriae ("Of Holy Memory")
SD. -- Sedit ("He sat")
SSA. -- Subscripta ("Subscribed")
S.I.D. -- Spiritus In Deo ("Spirit [rests] in God")
S.P. -- Sepultus ("Buried"); or Sepulchrum ("Sepulchre")
SS. -- Sanctorum (Of the Saints)
S.V. -- Sacra Virgo ("Holy Virgin")
T., TT. -- Titulus, Tituli ("Title", "Titles")
TM. -- Testamentum ("Testament")
V. -- Vixit ("He Lived"); or Vixisti ("Thou didst Live")
VB. -- Vir Bonus ("A Good Man")
V.C. -- Vir Clarissimus ("A Most Illustrious Man")
VV. CC. -- Viri Clarissimi ("Most Illustrious Men")
V.H. -- Vir Honestus ("A Worthy Man")
V. X. -- Vivas, Care [or Cara] ("Mayest thou Live, Dear One");
or Uxor Carissima ("Most Dear Wife")
X., XPC., XS. -- Christus ("Christ")
ABBREVIATIONS OF TITLES OF THE PRINCIPAL RELIGIOUS ORDERS AND CONGREGATIONS OF
PRIESTS
A.A. -- Augustiniani Assumptionis (Assumptionists)
A.B.A. -- Antoniani Benedictini Armeni (Mechitarists)
C.J.M. -- Congregation Jesu et Mariae (Eudist Fathers)
C.M. -- Congregatio Missionis (Lazarists)
C.M. -- Congregatio Mariae (Fathers of the Company of Mary)
C.P. -- Congregatio Passionis (Passionists)
C.PP.S. -- Congregatio Pretiosissimi Sanguinis (Fathers of the
Most Precious Blood)
C.R. -- Congregatio Resurrectionis (Resurrectionist Fathers)
C.R.C.S. -- Clerici Regulares Congregationis Somaschae (Somaschi
Fathers)
C.R.I.C. -- Canonici Regulares Immaculate Conecptionis ("Canons
Regular of the Immaculate Conception")
C.R.L. -- Canonici Regulares Lateranenses ("Canons Regular of
the Lateran")
C.R.M. -- Clerici Regulares Minores ("Clerks Regular Minor",
Mariani)
C.R.M.D. -- Clerici Regulares Matris Dei ("Clerks Regular of the
Mother of God")
C.R.M.I. -- Clerici Regulares Ministrantes Infirmis ("Clerks
Regular Attendant on the Sick", Camillini, Camilliani)
C.R.P. -- Congregatio Reformatorum Praemonstratensium
(Premonstratensians)
C.R.S.P. -- Clerici Regulares Sancti Pauli (Barnabites)
C.R.S.P. -- Clerici Regulares Pauperum Matris Dei Scholarum
Piarum ("Clerks Regular of the Poor Men of the Mother of God for
Pious Schools", Piarists)
C.R.T. -- Clerici Regulares Theatini (Theatines)
C.S.B. -- Congregatio Sancti Basilii (Basilians)
C.S.C. -- Congregatio Sanctae Crucis (Fathers and Brothers of
the Holy Cross)
C.S.P. -- Congregatio Sancti Pauli (Paulists)
C.S.Sp. -- Congregatio Sancti Spiritus (Fathers of the Holy
Ghost)
C.S.V. -- Clerici Sancti Viatoris (Clerks, or Clerics, of St.
Viateur)
C.SS.CC. -- Congregatio Sacratissimorum Cordium (Missionaries of
the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary)
C. SS. R. -- Congregatio Sanctissimi Redemptoris (Redemptorists)
Inst. Char. -- Institutum Charitatis (Rosminians)
M.C. -- Missionaries of Charity
M.S. -- Missionaries of La Salette [France]
M.S.C. -- Missionarii Sancti Caroli ("Missionaries of St.
Charles")
M.S.C. -- Missionarii Sacratissimi Cordis ("Missionaries of the
Most Sacred Heart")
O.C. -- Ordo Charitatis (Fathers of the Order of Charity)
O. Camald. -- Ordo Camaldulensium (Camaldolese)
O. Cart. -- Ordo Cartusiensis (Carthusians)
O. Cist. -- Ordo Cisterciensium (Cistercians)
O.C.C. -- Ordo Carmelitarum Calceatorum (Carmelites)
O.C.D. -- Ordo Carmelitarum Discalceatorum (Discalced, or
Barefoot, Carmelites)
O.C.R. -- Ordo Reformatorum Cisterciensium (Cistercians,
Trappists)
O.F.M. -- Ordo Fratrum Minorum (Observant Franciscans)
O.M. -- Ordo [Fratrum] Minimorum (Minims of St. Francis of Paul)
O. Merced. -- Ordo Beatae Mariae Virginis de Redemptione
Captivorum (Mercedarians, Nolaschi)
O.M.C. -- Ordo Minorum Conventualium (Conventual Franciscans)
O.M. Cap., O.F.M. Cap., O.M.C. -- Ordo Minorum Cappucinorum
(Capuchins)
O.M.I. -- Oblati Mariae Immaculatae (Oblate Fathers of Mary
Immaculate)
O.P., Ord Fratr. Praed. -- Ordo Praedicatorum (Dominicans)
Ord. Praem. -- Ordo Praemonstratensium (Premonstratensians,
Norbertines)
O.S.A. -- Ordo [Eremitarum] Sancti Augustini (Augustinians)
O.S.B. -- Ordo Sancti Benedicti (Benedictines)
O.S.C. -- Oblati Sancti Caroli (Oblate Fathers of St. Charles)
O.S.F.C. -- Ordinis Sancti Francisci Capuccini (Franciscan
Capuchins)
O.S.F.S. -- Oblati Sancti Francisci Salesii (Oblate Fathers of
St. Francis of Sales)
O.S.H. -- Ordo [Eremitarum] Sancti Hieronymi (Hieronymites)
O.S.M. -- Ordo Servorum Mariae (Servites)
O.SS.C. -- Oblati Sacratissimi Cordis ("Oblate Fathers of the
Sacred Heart")
O. Trinit. -- Ordo Sanctissimae Trinitatis (Trinitarians)
P.O. -- Pr tres de l Oratoire, Presbyteri Oratorii (Oratorians)
P.S.M. -- Pia Societas Missionum (Fathers of the Pious Society
of Missions, Pallottini)
P.S.S. -- Presbyteri Sancti Sulpicii, Pr tres de S. Sulpice
(Sulpicians)
S.C. -- Salesianorum Congregatio (Congregation of St. Francis of
Sales -- Salesian Fathers)
S.D.S. -- Societas Divini Salvatoris ("Society of the Divine
Saviour")
S.D.V. -- Societas Divini Verbi (Fathers of the Divine Word)
S.J. -- Societas Jesu ("Society of Jesus", i.e. the Jesuits)
S.M. -- Societas Mariae (Marists)
S.P.M. -- Societas Patrum Misericordiae (Fathers of Mercy)
S.S.S. -- Societas Sanctissimi Sacramenti (Fathers of the
Blessed Sacrament)
Most manuals of palaeography (Greek and Latin) contain lists of
Abbreviations (ancient and medieval), some of which are yet of
ecclesiastical interest, while others have long since become
obsolete or rare, and concern only the reader of manuscripts.
Some manuals of diplomatics, likewise, have useful lists of
pontifical chancery abbreviations, e.g. QUANTIN, Dict. de
diplomatique chretienne (Paris, 1846). 26-42, and Prou (Paris,
1902). in the latter work may be seen the original script-forms
of these Abbreviations. Facsimiles of abbreviated pontifical
documents may be seen, e.g. in DENIFLE, Specimina Palaeographica
ab Innoc. III ad Urban. V. (Rome, 1888) The Abbreviations in
Greek manuscripts were first scientifically studied by the
Benedictine MONTFAUCON in his famous Palaeographica Graeca
(Paris, 1708); see the lntroductions to Greek Palaeography of
GARDTHAUSEN and WATTENBACH The little work, Modus legendi
abreviaturas in jure tam civili quam pontificio occurrentes
(Venice, 1596), is one of the earliest attempts at a dictionary
of medieval abbreviations. A very useful work for all Latin
abbreviations is that of CAPELLI, Dizionario delle abbreviature
latine ed italiane (Milan, 1900); it is written mostly in Latin
and describes all the abbreviations ordinarily used in Latin and
Italian documents, civil or ecclesiastical Other valuable works
dealing specifically with abbreviations in pontifical documents
are DE LA BRANA, Signos y Abreviaturas que se usan en los
documentos pontificios (Leon, 1884); RODENBERG, Epistolae saec.
XIII e regestis RR. PP. selectae (Berlin, 1883), I, 323. For an
extensive list of the abbreviations in the epitaphs of the
Catacombs see KRAUS, Real-Encycl. der Christi. Alterth.
(Freiburg, 1886), I, 47-51. The chapters on abbreviations of
medieval manuscripts in the palaeographical manuals of DE WAILLY
(Paris, 1843), CHASSANT (Paris, 1885), PAOLI (Florence, 1891),
REUSENS (Louvain, 1899), CARINI (Rome, 1889), and THOMPSON
(London, 1903) are recommended, also the excellent Lateinische
Palaeographie of STEFFENS (Freiburg, Switzerland, 1903, 3 vols.
fol. with many plates). See BATTANDIER, Abbreviations, in Ann.
Pont. Cath. (Paris 1900), 527-538.
THOMAS J. SHAHAN
Abbreviators
Abbreviators
( Abbreviare = "shorten", "curtail").
Abbreviators are those who make an abridgment or abstract of a
long writing or discourse. This is accomplished by contracting
the parts, i.e. the words and sentences; an abbreviated form of
writing common among the Romans. Abbreviations were of two
kinds,
+ the use of a single letter for a single word,
+ the use of a sign, note, or mark for a word or phrase.
The Emperor Justinian forbade the use of abbreviations in the
compilation of the "Digest" and afterwards extended his
prohibition to all other writings. This prohibition was not
universally obeyed. The abbreviators found it to their own
convenience and interest to use the abbreviated form, and
especially was this the case at Rome. The early Christians
practised the abbreviated mode, no doubt as an easy and safe way
of communicating with one another and safeguarding their secrets
from enemies and false brethren.
ECCLESIASTICAL ABBREVIATORS
In course of time the Apostolic Chancery adopted this mode of
writing as the curial style, still further abridging by omitting
the diphthongs ae and oe, and likewise all lines and marks of
punctuation. The ecclesiastical Abbreviators are officials of
the Holy See, inasmuch as they are among the principal officials
of the Apostolic Chancery, which is one of the oldest and most
important offices in the Roman Curia. The scope of its labour,
as well as the number of its officials, has varied with the
times. Up to the twelfth or thirteenth century, the duty of the
Apostolic, or Roman Chancery was to prepare and expedite the
pontifical letters and writs for collation of church dignities
and other matters of grave importance which were discussed and
decided in Consistory. About the thirteenth or fourteenth
century, the popes, whilst they lived at Avignon in France,
began to reserve the collation of a great many benefices, so
that all the benefices, especially the greater ones, were to be
conferred through the Roman Curia (Lega, Praelectiones Jur.
Can., I, ii, 287). As a consequence, the labour was immensely
augmented, and the number of Abbreviators necessarily increased.
To regulate the proper expedition of these reserved benefices,
Pope John XXII instituted the rules of chancery to determine the
competency and mode of procedure of the Chancery. Afterwards the
establishment of the Dataria and the Secretariate of Briefs
lightened the work of the Chancery and led to a reduction in the
number of Abbreviators. According to Ciampini (Lib. de
Abbreviatorum de parco majore etc., cap. i) the institution of
abbreviators was very ancient, succeeding after the persecutions
to the notaries who recorded the acts of the martyrs. Other
authors reject this early institution and ascribe it to Pope
John XXII (1316). It is certain that he uses the name
Abbreviators, but speaks as if they had existed before his time,
and had, by overtaxation for their labour, caused much complaint
and protest He (Extravag. Joan. tit. xiii, "Cum ad Sacrosanctae
Romanae Ecclesiae") prescribes their work, determines how much
they may charge for their labour, fixes a certain tax for an
abstract or abridgment of twenty-five words, or their
equivalent, 150 letters, forbids them to charge more, even
though the abstract goes over twenty-five words but less than
fifty words, enacts that the basis of the tax is the labour
employed in writing, expediting, etc., the Bulls, and by no
means the emoluments accruing to the recipient of the favour or
benefice conferred by the Bull, and declares that whoever shall
charge more than the tax fixed by him shall be suspended for six
months from office, and upon a second violation of the law,
shall be deprived of it altogether, and if the delinquent be an
abbreviator, he shall be excommunicated. Should a large letter
have to be rewritten, owing to the inexact copy of the
abbreviator, the abbreviator and not the receiver of the Bull
must pay the extra charge for the extra labour to the apostolic
writer. Whatever may be the date of the institution of the
office of abbreviator, it is certain that it became of greater
importance and more highly privileged upon its erection into a
college of prelates. Pope Martin V (Constit. 3 "In Apostolicae",
ii and v) fixed the manner for their examination and approbation
and also the tax they should demand for their labour and the
punishment for overcharge. He also assigned to them certain
emoluments. The Abbreviators of the lower, or lesser, were to be
promoted to the higher, or greater, bar or presidency. Their
offices were compatible with other offices, i.e. they can hold
two benefices or offices at one and the same time, some
conferred by the Cardinal Vice-Chancellor, others by the Holy
Father.
ERECTION OF THE OFFICE: INTO A COLLEGE OF PRELATES
In the pontificate of Pius II, their number, which had been
fixed at twenty-four, had overgrown to such an extent as to
diminish considerably the individual remuneration, and, as a
consequence, able and competent men no longer sought the office,
and hence the old style of writing and expediting the Bulls was
no longer used, to the great injury of justice, the interested
parties, and the dignity of the Holy See. To remedy this evil
and to restore the old established chancery style, the Pope
selected out of the great number of the then living Abbreviators
seventy, and formed them into a college of prelates, and decreed
that their office should be perpetual, that certain emoluments
should be attached to it, and granted certain privileges to the
possessors of the same. He ordained further that some should be
called "Abbreviators of the Upper Bar" ( de Parco Majori), the
others of the Lower Bar ( de Parco Minori); that the former
should sit upon a slightly raised portion of the chamber,
separated from the rest of the hall or chamber by lattice work,
assist the Cardinal Vice-Chancellor, subscribe the letters and
have the principal part in examining, revising, and expediting
the apostolic letters to be issued with the leaden seal; that
the latter, however, should sit among the apostolic writers upon
benches in the lower part of the chamber, and their duty was to
carry the signed schedules or supplications to the prelates of
the upper bar. Then one of the prelates of the upper bar made an
abstract, and another prelate of the same bar revised it.
Prelates of the upper bar formed a quasi- tribunal, in which as
a college they decided all doubts that might arise about the
form and quality of the letters, of the clauses and decrees to
be adjoined to the apostolic letters, and sometimes about the
payment of the emoluments and other contingencies. Their opinion
about questions concerning chancery business was held in the
highest estimation by all the Roman tribunals. Paul II
suppressed this college; but Sixtus IV (Constitutio 16,
"Divina") reestablished it. He appointed seventy-two
abbreviators, of whom twelve were of the upper, or greater, and
twenty-two of the lower, or lesser, presidency ( Parco), and
thirty-eight examiners on first appearance of letters. They were
bound to be in attendance on certain days under penalty of fine,
and sign letters and diplomas. Ciampini mentions a decree of the
Vice-Chancellor by which absentees were mulcted in the loss of
their share of the emoluments of the following chancery session.
The same Pope also granted many privileges to the College of
Abbreviators, but especially to the members of the greater
presidency. Pius VII suppressed many of the chancery offices,
and so the Tribunal of Correctors and the Abbreviators of the
lower presidency disappeared. Of the Tribunal of Correctors, a
substitute-corrector alone remains. Bouix (Curia Romana, edit.
1859) chronicles the suppression of the lower presidency and
puts the number of Abbreviators at that date at eleven. The
present college consists of seventeen prelates, six substitutes,
and one sub-substitute, all of whom, except the prelates, may be
clerics or laymen. Although the duty of Abbreviators was
originally to make abstracts and abridgments of the apostolic
letters, diplomas, etc., using the legal abbreviations, clauses,
and formularies, in course of time, as their office grew in
importance they delegated that part of their office to their
substitute and confined themselves to overseeing the proper
expedition of the apostolic letters. Prior to the year 1878, all
apostolic letters and briefs requiring for their validity the
leaden seal were engrossed upon rough parchment and in Gothic
characters (round letters, also called Gallicum and commonly
Bollatico, but in Italy today Teutonic) without lines, or
diphthongs, or marks of punctuation. Bulls engrossed on a
different parchment, or in different characters with lines and
punctuation marks, or without the accustomed abbreviations,
clauses, and formularies, would be rejected as spurious. Pope
Leo XIII (Constitutio Universae Eccles., 29 Dec., 1878) ordained
that they should be written henceforth in ordinary Latin
characters upon ordinary parchment, and that no abbreviations
should be used except those easily understood.
TITLES AND PRIVILEGES
Many great privileges were conferred upon Abbreviators in the
past. By decree of Leo X they were created nobles, Counts
Palatine, familiars and members of the papal household, so that
they might enjoy all the privileges of domestic prelates and of
prelates in actual attendance on the Pope, as regards plurality
of benefices as well as expectives. They and their clerics and
their properties were exempt from all jurisdiction except the
immediate jurisdiction of the Pope, and they were not subject to
the judgments of the Auditor of Causes, or to the Cardinal
Vicar. He also empowered them to confer (today within strict
limitations) the degree of Doctor, with all university
privileges, create notaries (now abrogated), legitimize children
so as to make them eligible to receive benefices vacated by
their fathers (now revoked), also to ennoble three persons and
to make Knights of the Order of St. Sylvester ( Militiae
Aureae), the same to enjoy and to wear the insignia of nobility.
Pope Gregory XVI rescinded this privilege and reserved to the
Pope the right of creation of such knights (Acta Pont. Greg.
XVI, Vol. III, 178-179-180). Pope Paul V, who in early manhood
was a member of the College (Const. 2, "Romani"), made them
Referendaries of Favours, and after three years of service,
Referendaries likewise of Justice, enjoying the privileges of
Referendaries and permitting one to assist in the signatures
before the Pope, giving all a right to a portion in the papal
palace and exempting them from the registration of favours as
required by Pius IV (Const., 98) with regard to matters
pertaining to the Apostolic Chamber. They follow immediately
after the twelve voting members of the Signature in capella.
Abbreviators of the greater presidency are permitted to wear the
purple cassock and cappa, as also rochet in capella.
Abbreviators of the lower presidency before their suppression
were simple clerics, and according to permission granted by
Sixtus IV (loc. cit.) might be even married men. These offices
becoming vacant by death of the Abbreviator, no matter where the
death take place, are reserved in Curia. The prelates could
resign their office in favour of others. Formerly these offices
as well as those of the other chancery officers from the Regent
down were occasions of venality, which many of the popes,
especially Benedict XIV and Pius VII, laboured most strenuously
to abolish. Leo XIII (Motu Proprio, 4 July, 1898) most solemnly
decreed the abolition of all venality in the transfer or
Collation of the said offices. As domestic prelates, prelates of
the Roman Court, they have personal preeminence in every diocese
of the world. They are addressed as "Reverendissimus", "Right
Reverend", and "Monsignor". As prelates, and therefore
possessing the legal dignity, they are competent to receive and
execute papal commands. Benedict XIV (Const. 3, "Maximo")
granted prelates of the greater presidency the privilege of
wearing a hat with purple band, which right they hold even after
they have ceased to be abbreviators.
FERRARIS, Bibliotheca, s.v. Abbreviatores; ANDRE-WAGNER, Dict.
de Droit Canon., s.v. Abreviateurs; VAN ESPEN, Jurist Eccles.
Univ., Pt. I, tit. xxiii, Cap. i; BRANCATI DE
LAUREA-PARAVICINA-POLYANTHEA, Sac. Can., s.v. Abbreviatores;
RIGANTI, In Reg. Cancell., IV, Index; LEGA, Proelect. Jur. Can.,
Lib. I, vol. II, De Cancellaria Apostolica, p. 285; CIAMPINI, De
Abbreviatorum de Parco Majori, etc.; DE LUCA, Relatio Romanae
Curiae Forensis., Disc. x, n. 9; PETRA, Commentaria in Constit.
Apostolicas, IV, 232-233; V. 302-303.
P.M.J. ROCK
Abdera
Abdera
A titular see in the province of Rhodope on the southern coast
of Thrace, now called Bouloustra. It was founded about 656 B.C.
Abdias
Abdias
(A Minor Prophet).
This name is the Greek form of the Hebrew `Obhadhyah, which
means "the servant [or worshipper] of Yahweh". The fourth and
shortest of the minor prophetical books of the Old Testament (it
contains only twenty-one verses) is ascribed to Abdias. In the
title of the book it is usually regarded as a proper name. Some
recent scholars, however, think that it should be treated as an
appellative, for, on the one hand, Holy Writ often designates a
true prophet under the appellative name of "the servant of
Yahweh", and on the other, it nowhere gives any distinct
information concerning the writer of the work ascribed to
Abdias. It is true that in the absence of such authoritative
information Jews and Christian traditions have been freely
circulated to supply its place; but it remains none the less a
fact that "nothing is known of Abdias; his family, station in
life, place of birth, manner of death, are equally unknown to
us" (Abbe Trochon, Les petits prophetes, 193). The only thing
that may be inferred from the work concerning its author is that
he belonged to the Kingdom of Juda. The short prophecy of Abdias
deals almost exclusively with the fate of Edom as is stated in
its opening words. God has summoned the nations against her. She
trusts in her rocky fastnesses, but in vain. She would be
utterly destroyed, not simply spoiled as by thieves (1-6). Her
former friends and allies have turned against her (7), and her
wisdom shall fail her in this extremity (8,9). She is justly
punished for her unbrotherly conduct towards Juda when
foreigners sacked Jerusalem and cast lots over it (10-11). She
is bidden to desist from her unworthy conduct (12-14). The "day
of Yahweh" is near upon "all the nations", in whose ruin Edom
shall share under the united efforts of "the house of Jacob" and
"the house of Joseph" (16-18). As for Israel, her borders will
be enlarged in every direction; "Saviours" shall appear on Mount
Sion to "judge" the Mount of Esau, and the rule of Yahweh shall
be established (19-20).
DATE OF THE PROPHECY OF ABDIAS
Besides the shortness of the book of Abdias and its lack of a
detailed title such as is usually prefixed to the prophetical
writings of the Old Testament, there are various reasons,
literary and exegetical, which prevents scholars from agreeing
upon the date of its composition. Many among them (Keil, Orelli,
Vigouroux, Trochon, Lesetre, etc.) assign its composition to
about the reign of Joram (ninth century B.C.).Their main ground
for this position is derived from Abdias's reference (11-14) to
a capture of Jerusalem which they identify with the sacking of
the Holy City by the Philistines and the Arabians under Joram
(II Paralip., xxi, 16,17). The only other seizure of Jerusalem
to which Abdias (11-14) could be understood to refer would be
that which occurred during the lifetime of the prophet Jeremias
and was effected by Nabuchodonosor (588-587 B.C.). But such
reference to this latter capture of the Jewish capital is ruled
out, we are told, by the fact that Jeremias's description of
this event (Jer., xlix, 7-22) is so worded as to betray its
dependence on Abdias (11-14) as on an earlier writing. It is
ruled out also by Abdias's silence concerning the destruction of
the city or of the Temple which was carried out by
Nabuchodonosor, and which, as far as we know, did not occur in
the time of King Joram. A second argument for this early date of
the prophecy is drawn from a comparison of its text with that of
Amos and Joel. The resemblance is intimate and, when closely
examined, shows, it is claimed, that Abdias was anterior to both
Joel and Amos. In fact, in Joel, ii, 32 (Heb., iii, 5) "as the
Lord hath said" introduces a quotation from Abdias (17). Hence
it is inferred that the prophecy of Abdias originated between
the reign of Joram and the time of Joel and Amos, that is, about
the middle of the ninth century B.C. The inference is said also
to be confirmed by the purity of style of Abdias's prophecy.
Other scholars, among whom may be mentioned Meyrick, Jahn,
Ackerman, Allioli, etc., refer the composition of the book to
about the time of the Babylonian Captivity, some three centuries
after King Joram. They think that the terms of Abdias (11-14)
can be adequately understood only of the capture of Jerusalem by
Nabuchodonosor; only this event could be spoken of as the day
"when strangers carried away his [Juda's] army captive, and
foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon
Jerusalem"; as "the day of his [Juda's] leaving his country . .
. . the day of their [the children of Juda's] destruction"; "the
day of their ruin"; etc. They also admit that Abdias (20)
contains an implicit reference to the writer as one of the
captives in Babylon. Others again, ascribe the present book of
Abdias to a still later date. They agree with the defenders of
the second opinion in interpreting Abdias (11-14) as referring
to the capture of Jerusalem by Nabuchodonosor, but differ from
them in holding that (20) does not really prove that the author
of the book lived during the Babylonian exile. They claim that a
close study of Abdias (15-21), with its apocalyptic features
(reference to the day of the Lord as being at hand upon all
nations, to a restoration of all Israel, to the wonderful extent
of territory and position in command which await the Jews in
God's kingdom), connects necessarily the prophecy of Abdias with
other works in Jewish literature [Joel, Daniel, Zacharias
(ix-xiv)] which, as they think, belong to a date long after the
return from Babylon. These, then are the three leading forms of
opinion which prevail at the present day regarding the date of
composition of the book of Abdias, none of which conflicts with
the prophetical import of the work concerning the utter ruin of
Edom at a later date and concerning the Messianic times.
Phillippe, in Dict. de la Bible; Selbie, in Hast., Dict. of
Bible, s.v. Obadiah. Recent Commentaries: Trochon (1883); Peters
(1892); Perowne (1898); Nowack (1897).
FRANCIS E. GIGOT
Abdias of Babylon
Abdias of Babylon
An apocryphal writer, said to have been one of the seventy-two
Disciples of Christ, and first Bishop of Babylon, consecrated by
Sts. Simon and Jude. Very little is known about him, and the
main reason for mentioning him is a work in ten books called
Historia Certaminis Apostolici which is imputed to him. It tells
of the labours and deaths of the Apostles. This compilation
purports to have been translated from Hebrew into Greek by
Eutropius, a disciple of Abdias, and, in the third century, from
Greek into Latin by (Julius) Africanus, the friend of Origen.
But it is really a Latin work, for in it are cited, with the
Vulgate of St. Jerome, the Ecclesiastical History of Rufinus and
his Latin translation of the "Recognitiones" of Clement. The
interest of the work is due to what the author claims to have
drawn from the ancient Acta of the Apostles, and to many ancient
legends which have thus been brought down to us. The text of the
pseudo-Abdias may be found in Fabricius, Codex Apocryphus Novi
Testimenti (Hamburg, 1700), 402-742, though there are parallel
texts of single books printed in the Acta Sanctorum. According
to R.A. Lipsius, the work was compiled during the latter half of
the sixth century, in some Frankish monastery, for the purpose
of satisfying the natural curiosity of Western Christians. At
the same time he used much older pseudo-Apostolic materials that
he abridged or excerpted to suit his purpose, and often revised
or expurgated in the sense of Catholic teaching, for not a few
of the writings that he used were originally Gnostic
compositions, and abounded in speeches and prayers destined to
spread that heresy.
BATIFFOL, in Dict. de la Bible, 24; LIPSIUS, Die Apokryphen
Apostelgeschichten (Brunswick, 1883), 1, 177-178; BATIFFOL, in
Dict. de th ol. cath., I, 23; LIPSIUS, in Dict. of Christ.
Biogr., I, 1-4.
JOHN J. A'BECKET
Abdication
Abdication
Abdication, ecclesiastically considered, is the resignation of a
benefice or clerical dignity. Every such honour or emolument,
from the papal throne to the humblest chantry, may be resigned
by the incumbent. The general ecclesiastical law concerning Such
abdications (exclusive of a papal resignation) is that the
benefice must be resigned into the hands of the proper
ecclesiastical superior. Moreover, the resignation must be
prompted by a just cause, be voluntary and free from contracts
involving simony. Resignations, however, may be made with
accompanying stipulations, such as that the resigned benefice be
bestowed upon a designated person, or that the abdicating cleric
be provided with another office. It is also required that the
one who resigns his benefice, if in sacred orders, should have
other certain means of support commensurate with his dignity.
Resignations may be not only express but also tacit. The latter
is presumed to have taken place when a cleric accepts an office
or commits an act incompatible with the holding of an
ecclesiastical dignity, such as solemn profession in a religious
order, enrolment in the army, contracting marriage, and the
like. No resignation takes effect until it is accepted by the
proper authority. Hence, those who hold office from a bishop
must resign into his hands and obtain his acquiescence. Bishops,
in like manner, must resign into the hands of the Pope.
Vicars-general cannot accept resignations unless they receive
powers ad hoc from the bishop. When a bishop abdicates his see,
he may renounce both the episcopal benefice and dignity or only
the benefice. If he resigns both he cannot in future perform any
episcopal functions, even with the consent of the ordinary of
the diocese where he resides. If he resign, however, only the
benefice, and not the dignity, he still remains capable of
performing such episcopal functions as other bishops may request
him to exercise. Of course, in the former case, if an abdicated
bishop should nevertheless ordain candidates, such action would
be valid, as his episcopal character is indelible, but it would
be entirely illicit and entail grave consequences both for
ordainer and ordained. A bishop's Abdication of his see goes
into effect as soon as the Pope has accepted it in a papal
consistory. The bishopric then becomes vacant, but the actions
of the prelate retain their validity until he receives official
notice of the acceptance of his resignation.
Like every other ecclesiastical dignity, the papal throne may
also be resigned. The reasons which make it lawful for a bishop
to abdicate his see, such as the necessity or utility of his
particular church, or the salvation of his own soul, apply in a
stronger manner to the one who governs the universal church. It
is true that the Roman Pontiff has no superior on earth into
whose hands he can resign his dignity, yet he himself by the
papal power can dissolve the spiritual marriage between himself
and the Roman Church. A papal Abdication made without cause may
be illicit, but it is unquestionably valid, since there is no
one who can prohibit it ecclesiastically and it contravenes no
divine law. The papacy does not, like the episcopacy, imprint an
indelible character on the soul, and hence by his voluntary
Abdication the Pope is entirely stripped of all jurisdiction,
just as by his voluntary acceptance of the election to the
primacy he acquired it. All doubt as to the legitimacy of papal
abdications and all disputes among canonists were put an end to
by the decree of Pope Boniface VIII which was received into the
Corpus Juris Canonici (Cap. Quoniam I, de renun., in 6). The
Pontiff says:
Our predecessor, Pope Celestine V, whilst he governed the Church,
constituted and decreed that the Roman Pontiff can freely resign.
Therefore lest it happen that this statute should in the course of
time fall into oblivion, or that doubt upon the subject should lead
to further disputes, We have determined with the counsel of our
brethren that it be placed among other constitutions for a perpetual
memory of the same.
Ferraris declares that the Pope should make his abdication into
the hands of the College of Cardinals, as to that body alone
pertains the election of his successor. For whilst it is true
that the Cardinals did not bestow the papal jurisdiction upon
him, yet they designated him as the successor of Peter, and they
must be absolutely certain that he has renounced the dignity
before they can validly proceed to the election of another
pontiff. Church history furnishes a number of examples of papal
abdications. Leaving aside the obscure case of Pope Marcellinus
(296-308) adduced by Pezzani, and the still more doubtful
resignation of Pope Liberius (352-366) which some historians
have postulated in order to solve the perplexing position of
Pope Felix II, we may proceed to unquestioned abdications. Pope
Benedict IX (1033-44), who had long caused scandal to the Church
by his disorderly life, freely renounced the pontificate and
took the habit of a monk. He repented of his abdication and
seized the papal throne again for a short time after the death
of Pope Clement II, but he finally died in a private station.
His immediate successor, Pope Gregory VI (1044-46) furnishes
another example of papal Abdication. It was Gregory who had
persuaded Benedict IX to resign the Chair of Peter, and to do so
he had bestowed valuable possessions upon him. After Gregory had
himself become Pope, this transaction was looked on by many as
simoniacal; and although Gregory's intentions seem to have been
of the best, yet it was deemed better that he too should
abdicate the papal dignity, and he did so voluntarily.
The classic example of the resignation of a Pope is that of St.
Celestine V (1294). before his election to the pontificate, he
had been a simple hermit, and his sudden elevation found him
unprepared and unfit for his exalted position. After five months
of pontificate, he issued a solemn decree in which he declared
that it was permissible for the Pope to abdicate, and then made
an equally solemn renunciation of the papacy into the hands of
the cardinals. He lived two years after his abdication in the
practice of virtues which afterwards procured his canonization.
Owing to the troubles which evil minded persons caused his
successor, Boniface VIII, by their theories about the
impossibility of a valid Abdication of the papal throne,
Boniface issued the above-cited decree to put the matter at rest
for all time. The latest instance of a papal resignation is that
of Pope Gregory XII (1406-15). It was at the time of the Great
Schism of the West, when two pretenders to the Chair of Peter
disputed Gregory's right, and rent the faithful into three
so-called "obediences". To put an end to the strife, the
legitimate Pope Gregory renounced the pontificate at the General
Council of Constance in 1415. It is well known that Pope Pius
VII (1800-23), before setting out for Paris to crown Napoleon in
1804, had signed an abdication of the papal throne to take
effect in case he were imprisoned in France (De Montor).
Finally, a valid Abdication of the Pope must be a free act,
hence a forced resignation of the papacy would be null and void,
as more than one ecclesiastical decree has declared.
SMITH, Elem. of Eccl. Law (New York, 1895), I; DE LUCA,
Praelect. Jur. Can. (Rome, 1897), II; CRAISSON, Manuale Jur.
Can. (Paris, 1899), I. For Papal Abdication see FERRARIS, Bibl.
Jur. Can., art. Papa (Rome, 1890); PEZZANI, Codex S.R.E.
Ecclesiae (Rome, 1893), I: WERNZ, Jus Decretal, (Rome, 1899),
II; DE MONTOR, Lives of Rom. Pont. (New York, 1866);
HERGENROeTHER, Handb. der allg. Kircheng. (Freiburg, 1886).
WILLIAM H.W. FANNING
Sts. Abdon and Sennan
Sts. Abdon and Sennen
(Variously written in early calendars and martyrologies Abdo,
Abdus; Sennes, Sennis, Zennen.)
Persian martyrs under Decius, about A.D. 250, and commemorated
30 July. The veneration paid them dates from as early as the
third century, though their Acts, written for the most part
prior to the ninth century, contain several fictitious
statements about the cause and occasion of their coming to Rome
and the nature of their torments. It is related in these Acts
that their bodies were buried by a subdeacon, Quirinus, and
transferred in the reign of Constantine to the Pontian cemetery
on the road to Porto, near the gates of Rome. A fresco found on
the sarcophagus supposed to contain their remains represents
them receiving crowns from Christ. Accordin to Martigny, this
fresco dates from the seventh century. Several cities, notably
Florence and Soissons, claim possession of their bodies, but the
Bollandists say that they rest in Rome.
Acta SS., 30 July. MARTIGNY, Dict. des antiq. chret., 1;
CHEETHAM, in Dict. Christ. Antiq,; BUTLER, Lives of the Saints,
July 30.
JOHN J. WYNNE
Abduction
Abduction
Abduction may be considered as a public crime and a matrimonial
diriment impediment. Viewed as a crime, it is a carrying off by
force, physical or moral, of any virtuous woman, or even man,
from a free and safe place to another place morally different
and neither free nor safe from the captor's power, with intent
to marry her or to gratify lust. Abduction considered as a
matrimonial Impediment is a violent taking away of any woman
whatsoever, chaste or unchaste, from a place free and safe to a
morally different place, and there detaining her in the power of
her abductor until he has coerced her into consenting to marry
him. Abduction as a crime is of wider scope than is the
impediment, inasmuch as the former includes man-captors and
intent to gratify lust, both of which are excluded from the
scope of the impediment. On the other hand, the impediment is of
wider import than the crime in as far as it includes all women,
chaste as well as unchaste, while the crime excludes the
corrupt. This difference arises from the fact that the State
aims to suppress the public crime as a menace to the safety of
the commonwealth, while the Church cares, directly and
immediately, for the freedom and the dignity of the Sacrament of
Marriage. Abduction is often divided into Abduction by Violence
( Raptus Violentiae) and Abduction by Seduction, or Elopement (
Raptus Seductionis). The former is when (a) a woman evidently
reluctant, and not consenting either to the flight or to the
marriage, is forcibly transferred with a matrimonial intent from
a secure and free place to a morally different one and there
held under the abductor's influence by force, physical or moral,
i.e. threats, great fear, or fraud equivalent to force, as it is
a well-known axiom that "it is equal to be compelled to do a
thing as to know that it is possible to be compelled to do it",
(b) a woman enticed by fair words and fraud and deception
consents to go with a man for other reason than matrimony from
one place to another where he detains her by force or fraud
equivalent to force, in order to coerce her into a marriage to
which she objects; (e) a woman who, although she had already
consented to a future marriage by act of betrothal, vet
strenuously objects to abduction, is carried off violently by
her betrothed or his agents from a free and safe place to
another morally different and there detained until she consents
to marry him. Some deny, however, that the raptor in this case
is guilty of abduction, saying that he has a right to his
betrothed. He has, indeed, a right to compel her to fulfil her
engagement by public authority, not, however, by private
authority. His carrying off of the woman against her will is the
exercise of private authority, and therefore violence to her
rights. Abduction by Seduction ( Raptus Seductionis), or
Elopement, is the taking away from one place to another, by a
man, of (1) a woman of age or under age who consents to both the
flight and the marriage without consent of her parents or
guardians; or (2) a woman who, although she refuses at first,
finally, induced thereto by caresses, flattery, or any
allurement, not however equivalent to force, physical or moral,
consents to both flight and marriage without knowledge or
consent of her parents or guardians. Abduction by seduction, as
defined is held by Roman law to be abduction by violence
inasmuch as violence can be offered to the woman and her parents
simultaneously, or to the woman alone, or to the parents and
guardians alone; and in the elopement, while no violence is done
to the woman, violence is done to the parents or guardians. On
the contrary, the Church does not consider violence done to
parents, but the violence done only to the parties matrimonially
interested. Hence, elopement, or abduction by seduction, does
not induce an impediment diriment. Pius VII, in his letter to
Napoleon I (26 June, 1805), pronounced this kind of abduction no
abduction in the Tridentine sense. The Church considers it,
indeed, a wrong against parental authority, but not a wrong to
the abducted woman.
The old Roman law ( Jus Vetus), mindful of the actual or
imaginary "Rape of the Sabines", dealt leniently with
woman-stealers. If the woman was willing, her marriage with her
abductor was allowed and solemnized by the lictor leading her by
the hand to the home of the raptor. Constantine the Great, to
protect female virtue and safeguard the State, forbade (A.D.
320) such marriages. The law was neither universally received
nor observed. The Emperor Justinian (A.D. 528, 533, and 548)
forbade these marriages and fixed the punishment, for the
principal and his accomplices in the crime, at death and
confiscation of all their property. Legal right to avenge the
crime was given to parents, relations, or guardians; to put to
instant death the abductor caught in the act of Abduction.
Appeal by the victim in behalf of her abductor, on the plea that
she gave consent, was denied. The law awarded the confiscated
property to the woman, if she had not consented to the
abduction; to her parents, if they were ignorant of, or adverse
to, it, and their daughter consented to the abduction; but if
the woman and her parents consented to the carrying off, then
all the property lapsed to the State, and the parents were
banished (Codex Just., IX, Tit. xiii; Auth. Collat., IX, Tit.
xxvi; Novell., 143; Auth. Collat., IX, Tit. xxxiii; Novell.
150). The Byzantine Emperor, Leo VI (886-912), called the
Philosopher, approved (Constit. XXXV) the former laws in all
particulars, with the exception that if swords or other deadly
weapons were carried by the abductor and his accomplices during
the abduction a much severer punishment was inflicted than if
they were not carried. The old Spanish law condemned to death
the abductor who also ravished the woman, but the abductor who
did not ravish was let off with a money fine to be equally
shared by the abducted and the State. If the woman had consented
to the abduction, the whole fine reverted to the State. Athenian
law commanded the abductor to marry the abducted, if she so
willed, unless the woman or her parents or guardians had already
received money instead. The earlier Byzantine law enjoined, but
the later law forbade, the marriage. Among the Germanic nations
the crime of abduction was compounded by pecuniary gifts to the
parents or guardians. The Church did not accept the Roman law
which declared all the marriages of the abductor with the
abducted, without exception, entirely and perpetually null and
void. She held as valid all marriages in which there was present
true and real consent of the captured women. According to St.
Basil (2 Canon. Epist. to St. Amphilochius, xxii, xxx, fixed
date, an. 375, Post-Nicene Fathers, 2d series, VIII, Scribner's
ed.), the Church issued no canons on abduction prior to his
time. Such a crime was, doubtless, extremely rare among the
early Christians. In the fourth century, as men grew more
audacious, the number of wife-captors became exceedingly
numerous. To check this, the Church in several particular
councils, besides the punishment of service, confiscation of
goods, and public penance, decreed sentence of excommunication
(to be judicially pronounced) against laics, and deposition from
ecclesiastical rank against clerics, who had violently carried
off, or helped to carry off, women. Pope Gelasius (496)
permitted the marriage of the abductor with his captive if she
was willing, and they had been betrothed, or had mutually
discussed their future marriage prior to the abduction.
Antecedent to the ninth century, however, the canons make no
mention of abduction ( raptus) as a matrimonial impediment,
either diriment or impedient. In the Western Church, at least
from the ninth century, the marriage of the captor with his
captive, or any other woman, was perpetually prohibited. This
was not, however, the universal church discipline, but rather
the discipline peculiar to those nations among whom the absence
of strict laws made abductions more numerous. The bishops of the
Frankish nation felt the necessity of severe legislation to meet
the evil, and therefore, in many particular Councils, e.g.
Aix-la-Chapelle (817), Meaux (845), etc., issued stringent
canons which continued as the peculiar law of the Franks until
it was abolished by Innocent III. Furthermore, the impediment
was impedient, not diriment (according to the most common
opinion). Marriages celebrated in opposition to the prohibition
were held to be valid, although illicit. The Council of Meaux
(845) forbade the abductor ever to marry the rapt woman, but
permitted his marriage with any other woman after he had
performed the prescribed public penance. Gratian ("Decretum
Caus.", XXXVI, quaest. ii, ad finem) inaugurated a milder
discipline. He, relying upon the (supposed) authority of St.
Jerome, taught that an abductor ought to be allowed to marry the
abducted, provided she was willing to have him for a husband.
After the publication of his decree in the twelfth century, this
milder discipline was generally observed and met with the
approval of many popes. Finally, Innocent III ("Decret. Greg.",
lib. V, tit. xvii, cap. vii, "De Raptoribus") decreed for the
universal Church (especially aiming at the perpetual prohibition
by the particular councils) that such marriages might take place
as often as a prior reluctance and dissent on the part of the
woman should change to willingness and consent to the marriage,
and this (according to the common interpretation) even if the
woman was in the power of the captor at the time she consented.
This decree practically did away with the impedient impediment
of abduction, which was merged into the impediment of vis et
metus. The Innocentian law continued to be the ecclesiastical
discipline up to the sixteenth century. The Council of Trent
introduced an entirely new discipline. To guard the liberty and
dignity of marriage, to show its detestation of a horrible crime
dangerous alike to the purity of morals and the peace and
security of society, and to bar the criminal from gaining the
result intended by his crime, the Fathers decreed: between the
abductor and abducted there can be no marriage, as long as she
remains in the power of the raptor; but if the abducted, having
been separated from the abductor, and having been placed in a
safe and free place, consents to have him for a husband, let her
marry him; yet, notwithstanding, the abductor with all his
advisers, accomplices and abettors, are by the law itself
excommunicated and declared forever infamous, incapable of
acquiring dignities, and, if they be clerics, deposed from their
ecclesiastical rank. Furthermore, the abductor is bound, whether
he marries the abducted or not, to dower her with a decent dowry
at the discretion of the judge (Concil. Trid., Sess. XXIV, vi,
"De Reform Matrim."). This law was to take immediate effect,
requiring no promulgation in individual parishes. Such also is
the law in the Oriental Churches (Synod. Mont. Liban., 1736,
Collect. Lacens., II, 167; Synod. Sciarfien. Syror., 1888). The
difference between this law and that of the Decretals (Innocent
III) is evident. According to the Decretals, the woman's
consent, given even while she was in the raptor s power, was
deemed sufficient. The Council of Trent does not consider such
consent of any avail, and requires consent given after the woman
has been entirely separated from the control of the raptor and
is dwelling in a place safe and free from his influence. Should
she desire to marry him, the marriage may be celebrated, the
priest having first obtained permission from the bishop
(according to some) whose duty it is to testify to the cessation
of the impediment and that the dowry prescribed by the Council
has been made over and is subject to the sole use and discretion
of the abducted. The general law of the Church does not require
the aforesaid bishop's permission, but individual bishops can
and do make laws to that effect. The Council of Trent by this
law safeguarded the freedom of marriage (1) on the part of the
man, by allowing him to marry the abducted woman, and (2) on the
part of the woman, by protecting her from being coerced while in
the abductor's power into a marriage against her free will and
consent. This impediment of abduction ( raptus) is one entirely
distinct from that of vis et metus. The latter entirely looks to
the freedom of consent; the former, to the freedom of the place
where true consent must be elicited. Of ecclesiastical origin,
this impediment is temporary and public, and does not bind two
unbaptized persons unless the civil law of their country
invalidates such marriages. It does, however, govern the
marriage of an unbaptized abductor with a Catholic abducted
woman, and vice versa.
Amidst the conflicting opinions of canonists and moralists as to
whether abduction by seduction, abduction of a betrothed,
abduction of a minor against the will of her parents, or the
abduction of a man by a woman, induces the impediment or not, it
is necessary to remember that this impediment is of Tridentine
origin, and therefore the Council of Trent was sole judge of the
necessary conditions; that the Roman or any other civil law or
any prior ecclesiastical law had nothing to say in the matter;
that the question under investigation was the impediment, not
the crime, of abduction; and that in rebus odiosis, which this
is, the words of the Council of Trent must be strictly adhered
to and interpreted. Four elements are essential in an abduction
in order to induce thereby the Tridentine diriment impediment,
to wit: (1) a woman; (2) change of locality; (3) violence; (4)
matrimonial intent.
(1) Any woman, whether moral or immoral, maid or widow,
betrothed or not, even a public woman, may be the object of a
violent Abduction inducing the Tridentine impediment and
punishment. Lessius, Avancini, and others hold that a man is not
guilty of abduction who carries off his betrothed. The Council
of Trent makes no exception, hence we should not. The abduction
of a man by a woman is not included in the Tridentine law. the
contrary opinion (De Justis and other earlier authors) is at
variance with the language of the Council, which always speaks
of the raptor, but nowhere of the raptrix. A woman can be guilty
of the crime of raptus; but the question here is not about
crime, but about the Tridentine impediment. She may be an agent
or accomplice of the abductor and, as such, incur the penalties
decreed by the Council; but it does not admit her as raptrix.
(2) Change of Locality. -- Two places are necessary to an
abduction -- one, the place from which, the other, the place to
which, the reluctant woman is violently taken, and in which she
is also violently detained. These two places must be morally
(some say physically, some virtually) different -- the one, from
which may be her own or her parents' home, where she is a free
agent; the other, to which, must be subject to the power or
influence of the abductor, where, though she is free in very
many of her actions, she is not perfectly free in all. It is not
necessary that the place to which be the house of the abductor;
it suffices if it be under his control or influence. Two rooms
or two stories in a small dwelling, the home of one family; a
street and an adjoining house; a public highway and a nearby
field, would not afford the necessary change of locality.
Removal, though violent, from room to room as above, would not
induce the impediment under consideration, though some hold the
contrary opinion. In case of a large castle, or mansion, or
tenement-house, where many families dwell, the violent
transference of a reluctant woman from a part where her family
dwells to another remote part where a different family lives
would constitute sufficient change of locality. If a woman is
violently seized, v.g. in a room, and is violently kept there
without change to another room, or if she willingly, without any
enticement on the part of the man, goes to a place and is there
violently detained with matrimonial intent, she does not suffer
abduction in the Tridentine sense. It is a mere sequestration,
or detention. Some jurists, however, think otherwise, claiming
virtual change (from state of freedom to that of subjection) to
be sufficient to induce the Council's impediment. Physical
transference from one place to another, however, is absolutely
necessary to constitute raptus; virtual transference does not
suffice. Should a woman be forcibly removed from a place to
which she went willingly to another where she is detained
against her will with matrimonial intent, it is abduction.
(3) Violence. -- Abduction always presumes that the abducted
dissents, and that her unwillingness is overcome either by
physical force, i.e. laying hands upon her, or moral force, i.e.
threats, great fear, and fraud equivalent to force. Mere
importunities, fair words, sweet phrases, gifts, and promises
are not sufficient to constitute the moral force requisite for
abduction. It is immaterial whether the principal, of and by
himself, or through his agents and accomplices, uses this force,
moral or physical. Women as the agents of the principal, may
exercise it, and not infrequently do so.
(4) Matrimonial Intent. -- The intention or motive of the
criminal act is all important. To induce the impediment the
intent must be to marry the abducted woman. Were the motive
other than marriage, e.g. vengeance, pecuniary gain, or
gratification of lust, there would be no abduction, no
impediment, no penalties (S. Cong. Cone., 23 Jan., 1585). This
is evident also from the custom of the Roman Curia, which, in
all dispensations given or faculties granted to ordinaries to
dispense in eases of affinity, consanguinity, etc., prefixes
"provided that the woman was not abducted on account of this
[marriage]". This impediment exists only between the abducted
and abductor who, of and by himself, or with the assistance of
others, had carried her off with intent to marry her. No
impediment arises between the abducted and the agent or abettors
of the abduction. She could validly, therefore, marry one of the
agents or accomplices while still under the control of the
abductor. When the intention is doubtful, judgment is arrived at
from consideration of the circumstances. Thus, if a man
violently carries off his betrothed or a woman with whom he has
had conversations looking to future marriage, it is presumed
that his intention was marriage. If doubts still remain, the law
presumes the motive to be matrimonial. Where it is abundantly
evident that the initial motive of the abduction was lust, it is
not abduction, but sequestration, or detention, although
afterwards, during the captivity, the captor promise marriage in
order to attain his lustful object. The contrary opinion, held
by Rosset (De Matrimonio, II, 1354), Krimer, and others, is at
variance with the principle of law, that in crimes the
beginning, and not what happens accidentally is what the law
considers. Were the intent twofold, v.g. lust and marriage, then
the carrying off is abduction and induces the impediment. The
abduction must be proved, not presumed. The mere word of the
abducted woman, especially as against the oath of the so-called
abductor and the absence of all rumour, does not establish the
fact. The existence of the abduction once admitted, the burden
of proof rests upon the abductor. He must conclusively prove
that the abducted willingly consented to both abduction and
marriage. If she admits consent to the flight, he must still
prove conclusively that she gave willing consent also to the
marriage; otherwise the impediment holds and the penalties are
incurred. Should he claim (in order to exclude impediment) that
his motive in the beginning of the transaction was not marriage,
but lust, and that he proposed marriage in order to attain his
initial purpose, then he must, by the most conclusive evidence,
establish his assertion, since the law presumes that his motive
was matrimonial.
PUNISHMENTS
The abductor and his advisers and abettors and accomplices in a
complete (copula not required), not merely an attempted,
abduction are, by the law itself (Tridentine), excommunicated
(not reserved), and made perpetually infamous, incapable of
acquiring dignities; if they be clerics, they also incur
deposition from their ecclesiastical rank. The abductor is also
bound, whether the woman marries him or not, to dower her with a
decent dowry at the discretion of the bishop. The priest who
celebrates the marriage while the woman is under restraint does
not incur the excommunication nor any other penalty, unless he
has advised the abductor that he would aid him in his abduction
by his presence and ministry. The agents and the like, in an
abduction of a woman validly and freely betrothed, but unwilling
to be carried off, do not incur excommunication and other
Tridentine punishments (S. C. Prop. Fid., 17 April, 1784). The
vindictive punishments are incurred, at least in the
ecclesiastical court, by a declaratory sentence. The abducted
woman, not the abductor, has the right to challenge the validity
of her marriage celebrated while under control of the abductor.
No particular time is prescribed by law, but she should,
however, unless prevented by reasonable cause, present her plea
as soon as possible after her entire separation from the control
of the abductor.
DISPENSATION
The Church as a rule does not dispense with this impediment. It
even refuses to grant other dispensations, v.g. affinity, if the
woman was abducted; indeed any dispensation granted, in which
mention of the abduction has been omitted, is held as invalid.
There are some cases in which the Church has dispensed when it
is abundantly evident that the consent of the woman was really
free, although circumstances prevented her entire separation
from the control of the abductor. The late Instruction of the
Congregation of the Inquisition (15 February, 1901, in the
"Analecta Ecclesiastica," Rome, 1901, 98) to the bishops of
Albania (where abduction is of very frequent occurrence) refused
a general repeal of the law for their country, adding that the
frequency mentioned, far from being a reason for relaxing, was
rather a reason for insisting on the Tridentine law; yet, where
it was abundantly evident that the consent of the woman under
restraint was truly a free consent, and that there were reasons
sufficient for the dispensation, recourse should be had to Rome
in each single case. Further, in the extraordinary faculties
given to bishops (20 February, 1888) for dispensing in public
impediments persons in danger of death, the impediment of raptus
is not excluded. The civil codes of today, as a rule, do not
recognize abduction as an impediment diriment to civil marriage,
but consider it as a species of vis et metus. The codes of
Austria and Spain, however, still hold it as an impediment, and
among the jurists of Austria there is an earnest endeavour to
make it an impediment absolute and perpetual, so that the
abducted woman, if still under control of her abductor, may not
marry even a third party.
RIGANTI, Comment. in Reg., in Reg. xlix, nn. 46 sq.;
SCHMALZGRUeBER, V, xvii, De Rapt. Pers., nn. 1-54, GONSALEZ
TELLEZ, Comment. Perpet., V, xvii; BERARDI, Comment. in Jus.
Eccles., II, 81 sqq.; WERNZ, IV, Jus Matrim, 408 sqq.; ROSSET,
De Sac. Matrim., II, 1344 sqq.; VECCHIOTTI, Instit. Can., III,
234 sqq.; SANTI-LEITNER, IV, 58-65; FEIJE, De Imped. et
Dispens.; KUTSCHKER, Das Eherecht (1856), III, 456 sqq.;
Analecta Ecclesiastica (Rome, April, 1903); HOWARD, Hist. of
Matrimonial inst., I, 156 sq., s.v. Wife-Captor; Acta Sanctae
Sedis, I, 15-24; 54 sq.; GASPARI, De Matrim., I, 364 sqq.
P.M.J. ROCK
Abecedaria
Abecedaria
Complete or partial lists of letters of the alphabet, chiefly
Greek and Latin, inscribed on ancient monuments, Pagan and
Christian. At, or near, the beginning of the Christian era, the
Latin alphabet had already undergone its principal changes, and
had become a fixed and definite system. The Greek alphabet,
moreover, with certain slight modifications, was becoming
closely assimilated to the Latin. Towards the eighth century of
Rome, the letters assumed their artistic forms and lost their
older, narrower ones. Nor have the three letters added by the
Emperor Claudius ever been found in use in Christian
inscriptions. The letters themselves, it may be said, fell into
disuse at the death of the Emperor in question. The alphabet,
however, employed for monumental inscriptions differed so
completely from the cursive as to make it wholly impossible to
mistake the one for the other. The uncial, occurring very rarely
on sculptured monuments, and reserved for writing, did not make
its appearance before the fourth century. The number of
Christian objects bearing the Abecedaria, with the exception of
two vases found at Carthage, is extremely limited. On the other
hand, those of heathen origin are more plentiful, and include
certain tablets used by stone-cutters apprentices while learning
their trade. Stones have also been found in the catacombs,
bearing the symbols A, B, C, etc. These are arranged, sometimes,
in combinations which have puzzled the sagacity of scholars. One
such, found in the cemetery of St. Alexander, in the Via
Nomentana, is inscribed as follows:
AXBVCTESDR . . . . . .BCCEECHI
EQGPH. . . .M MNOPQ
RSTVXYZ
This represents, in all probability, a schoolboy's task, which
may be compared with a denarius of L. Cassius Caecinianus,
whereon the inscription runs thus:
AX, BV, CT, DS, ER, FQ, GP, HO, IN, KM
It is to St. Jerome that we owe an explanation of this curious
trifle. He tells us that, in order to train the memory of young
children, they were made to learn the alphabet in a double form,
joining A to X, and so on with the other letters. A stone found
at Rome in 1877, and dating from the sixth or seventh century,
seems to have been used in a school, as a model for learning the
alphabet, and, points, incidentally, to the long continuance of
old methods of teaching. ( See CHRISTIAN USE OF THE ALPHABET.)
H. LECLERCQ
Abecedarians
Abecedarians
A sect of Anabaptists who affected an absolute disdain for all
human knowledge, contending that God would enlighten His elect
interiorly and give them knowledge of necessary truths by
visions and ecstasies. They rejected every other means of
instuction, and pretended that to be saved one must even be
ignorant of the first letters of the alphabet; whence their
name, A-B-C-darians. They also considered the study of theology
as a species of idolatry, and regarded learned men who did any
preaching as falsifiers of God's word.
At Wittenberg, in 1522, Nicholas Storch (Pelargus) and the
Illuminati of Zwickau began to preach this doctrine, mixing it
up with other errors. Carlstadt allowed himself to be drawn away
by these singular views, and to put them thoroughly into
practice he abandoned his title of Doctor and became a street
porter. He preached the new doctrine for some time to the people
and to the students of Wittenberg.
JOHN J. A'BECKET
Abel (Son of Adam)
Abel
(From the Hebrew word for Vanity, "probably so called from the
shortness of his life"--Gesenius; Gr., Abel, whence Eng. form).
Abel was the second son of Adam. Vigouroux and Hummelauer
contend that the Assyrian aplu or ablu, const. Abal, i.e. "son,"
is the same word, not a case of orthographic coincidence,
especially as Hebrew and Assyrian are closely related tongues.
Some, with Josephus (Ant., I, ii), think it means "Sorrow" or
"Lamentation". Cheyne holds that "a right view of the story
favours the meaning shepherd, or more generally herdsman";
Assyrian ibilu (Ency. Bib., s.v.) "ram, camel, ass, or wild
sheep."
Cain, the first-born, was a farmer. Abel owned the flocks that
lived upon the soil. The two were, therefore, doubly brothers,
by birth and by calling. Abel is not mentioned in the Old
Testament except in Gen., iv. St. Augustine makes him a type of
the regenerate, and Cain of the natural, man. "Cain founded a
city on earth, but Abel as a stranger and pilgrim looked forward
to the city of the saints which is in heaven" (De Civ. Dei, XV,
i). The descendants of Cain were wicked, but, as nothing is said
about those of Abel, it is supposed that he had none; or at
least that no son was alive at the birth of Seth, "whom God has
given me for Abel", as Eve expressed it (Gen., iv, 25). The
Abelians, or Abelites, a sect in northern Africa mentioned by
St. Augustine (de Haer., lxxxvii), pretended that they imitated
Abel by marrying, yet condemned the use of marriage. They
adopted children who also married and lived in the same manner
as their foster-parents. The biblical account of the sacrifices
of the brothers and of the murder of Abel states that Cain
offered "of the fruits of the earth ", Abel "of the firstlings
of his flock, and of their fat". Cain's offerings are not
qualified, Abel's show that he gave with generosity and love,
and therefore found favour with God. Josephus says (Ant., I,
ii), "God was more delighted with the latter (Abel's) oblation,
when He was honoured with what grew naturally of its own accord
than He was with what was the invention of a covetous man, and
gotten by forcing the ground." St. John gives the true reason
why God rejected Cain's sacrifice and accepted that of Abel:
"his own works were wicked; and his brother's just" (I John,
iii, 12). God said later, "I will not receive a gift of your
hand" (Mal., i, 10). The love of the heart must sanctify the
lifting of the hands. Cain offered dans Deo aliquid suum, sibi
autem seipsum (de Civ. Dei, XV, vii), but God says to all what
St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians, "I seek not the things that
are yours, but you" (II Cor., xii, 14).
In Hebrew, Christian, and Arabic traditions and legends it is
said that God showed his acceptance of Abel's sacrifice by
sending fire to consume it, as in III Kings, xviii, 38. Cain
thereupon resolved to kill his brother, thinking the latter
would supplant him as Jacob did Esau later; or because he
thought the seed of Abel would have the honour of crushing the
serpent's head (Gen., iii, l5.-Hummelauer, Curs. Com. S. Sac.).
St. Jerome (Com. in Ezech., VIII, xxvii, no. 316), following
Jewish tradition, makes the plain of Damascus the scene of the
murder, and interprets the name of the city sanguinem bibens
(blood-drinking). A traveller quoted with approval by the Rev.
S. Baring-Gould ( Legends of the Old-Testament Characters)
places the scene half a mile from Hebron; but there is no such
local tradition in the neighbourhood of Hebron. The Damascus
referred to is certainly the Syrian city. The Koran (Sura v, 30,
etc.) agrees with the Bible in the main facts about the
sacrifices and murder, but adds the legend that God sent a raven
which by scratching in the earth showed Cain how to bury his
brother. According to Jewish tradition, Adam and Eve were taught
by the raven how to bury their son, and God rewarded the raven
by granting three things: (1) his young were to be
inviolable,(2)abundance of food (3) his prayer for rain should
be granted (Pirke Rab: Eliezer, XXI).
In the New Testament Abel is often mentioned. His pastoral life,
his sacrifice, his holiness, his tragic death made him a
striking type of Our Divine Saviour. His just works are referred
to in I John, iii, 12; he is canonized by Christ himself (Matt.,
xxiii, 34, 35) as the first of the long line of prophets
martyred for justice' sake. He prophesied not by word, but by
his sacrifice, of which he knew by revelation the typical
meaning (Vigouroux); and also by his death (De Civ. Dei, XV,
xviii). In Heb., xii, 24, his death is mentioned, and the
contrast between his blood and that of Christ is shown. The
latter calls not for vengeance, but for mercy and pardon. Abel,
though dead, speaketh (Heb., xi, 4), Deo per merita, hominibus
per exemplum (Piconjo), i.e. to God by his merits, to men by his
example. For a rabbinic interpretation of the plural Hebrew word
meaning "bloods", in Gen., iv, 10, see Mishna San., IV, 5, where
it is said to refer to Abel and to his seed. The Fathers place
him among the martyrs. Martyrium dedicavit (St. Aug., op. cit.,
VI, xxvii); he is associated with St. John the Baptist by St.
Chrysostom (Adv. Judaeos, viii, 8); others speak in similar
terms. In the Western Church, however, he is not found in the
martyrologies before the tenth century (Encycl. theol., s.v.).
In the canon of the Mass his sacrifice is mentioned with those
of Melchisedech and Abraham, and his name is placed at the head
of the list of saints invoked to aid the dying. The views of
radical higher criticism may be summed up in the words of
Cheyne: "The story of Cain and Abel is an early Israelitish
legend retained by J as having a profitable tendency" (Encyci.
bib., s.v.). The conservative interpretation of the narrative
differs from that of the radical school of critics, because it
accepts the story as history or as having at least a historic
basis, while they regard it as only one of the legends of
Genesis.
Patristic references in P.G. and P.L.; GEIKIE, Hours with the
Bible; ID., The Descendants of Adam; ID., Creation to Patriarchs
(New York, 1890); HUMMELAUER, Cursus Scrip. Sac. (Paris 1895);
PALIS in VIG., Dict. de la Bible. FOR LEGENDS SEE: The Bible,
the Koran, and the Talmud, tr. from the Germ by WEIL (London,
1846), 23-27; STANLEY, Sinai and Palestine; Id., Legends about
Cain and Abel, 404, sqq.; BARING-GOULD, Legends of the Old
Testament Characters (Lon- don 1871) I, 6; GUNKEL, The Legends
of Genesis (tr., Chicago, 1901). For a strong presentation of
the HISTORICITY of the Old Test., against the claims of the
critical school, consult ORR, The Problems of the Old Testament
(New York, 1906); DRIVER, Genesis (1904).
JOHN J. TIERNEY
Abel (Place Name)
Abel
("Meadow")
Name of several places distinguished by additional words: (1)
Abel-Beth-Maacha (meadow of the house, or family, of Maacha). In
Vulgate also "Abeldomus and Maacha," "Abeldomus Mancha", "Abela
and Maacha"; identical with Abel-Maim (meadow of water), II
Par., xvi, 4. It was a, city in Upper Galilee, a little west of
Dan.--II K., xx. 14-19; III K., xv, 20; IV K., xv, 29; II Par.,
xvi, 4. (2) Abel-Keramim (meadow of vineyards), a village of the
Ammonites, about six miles from Philadelphia. Jud., xi, 33. (3)
Abelmehula, Abelmeula (Abelmechola, "a meadow of the dance"), in
the Jordan valley near Bethsan.--Jud., vii, 23; III K., iv, 12;
xix, 16. (4) Abel-Misraim (Vulg. "the mourning of Egypt"),
according to St. Jerome identical with the "threshing floor of
Atad." Gen., 1, 10 sq. (5) Abelsatim, Settim, Setim, Hebr. abhel
hashshittim (meadow of acacias) is a place in the plains of
Moab. Num., xxv, 1; xxxiii, 49; xxxiv-xxxvi; Jos., ii, 1; iii,
1; Mich. vi, 5. (6) The great Abel in I K., vi, 18, is a
misreading for the great ebhen (stone).
Vigouroux, in Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895) HAGEN, Lex. Bibl.
(Paris, 1905); HOLZAMMER, in Kirchenlex. (Freiburg, 1882);
CONDER, in Dict. of the Bible (New York, 1903).
A.J. MAAS
Peter Abelard
Peter Abelard
Dialectician, philosopher, and theologian, born 1079; died 1142.
Peter Abelard (also spelled Abeillard, Abailard, etc., while the
best manuscripts have Abaelardus) was born in the little village
of Pallet, about ten miles east of Nantes in Brittany. His
father, Berengar, was lord of the village, his mother's name was
Lucia; both afterwards entered the monastic state. Peter, the
oldest of their children, was intended for a military career,
but, as he himself tells us, he abandoned Mars for Minerva, the
profession of arms for that of learning. Accordingly, at an
early age, he left his father's castle and sought instruction as
a wandering scholar at the schools of the most renowned teachers
of those days. Among these teachers was Roscelin the Nominalist,
at whose school at Locmenach, near Vannes, Abelard certainly
spent some time before he proceeded to Paris. Although the
University of Paris did not exist as a corporate institution
until more than half a century after Abelard's death, there
flourished at Paris in his time the Cathedral School, the School
of Ste. Genevieve, and that of St. Germain des Pre, the
forerunners of the university schools of the following century.
The Cathedral School was undoubtedly the most important of
these, and thither the young Abelard directed his steps in order
to study dialectic under the renowned master ( scholasticus)
William of Champeaux. Soon, however, the youth from the
province, for whom the prestige of a great name was far from
awe-inspiring, not only ventured to object to the teaching of
the Parisian master, but attempted to set up as a rival teacher.
Finding that this was not an easy matter in Paris, he
established his school first at Melun and later at Corbeil. This
was, probably, in the year 1101. The next couple of years
Abelard spent in his native place "almost cut off from France",
as he says. The reason of this enforced retreat from the
dialectical fray was failing health. On returning to Paris, he
became once more a pupil of William of Champeaux for the purpose
of studying rhetoric. When William retired to the monastery of
St. Victor, Abelard, who meantime had resumed his teaching at
Melun, hastened to Paris to secure the chair of the Cathedral
School. Having failed in this, he set up his school in Mt. Ste.
Genevieve (1108). There and at the Cathedral School, in which in
1113 he finally succeeded in obtaining a chair, he enjoyed the
greatest renown as a teacher of rhetoric and dialectic. Before
taking up the duty of teaching theology at the Cathedral School,
he went to Laon where he presented himself to the venerable
Anselm of Laon as a student of theology. Soon, however, his
petulant restiveness under restraint once more asserted itself,
and he was not content until he had as completely discomfited
the teacher of theology at Laon as he had successfully harassed
the teacher of rhetoric and dialectic at Paris. Taking Abelard's
own account of the incident, it is impossible not to blame him
for the temerity which made him such enemies as Alberic and
Lotulph, pupils of Anselm, who, later on, appeared against
Abelard. The "theological studies" pursued by Abelard at Laon
were what we would nowadays call the study of exegesis.
There can be no doubt that Abelard's career as a teacher at
Paris, from 1108 to 1118, was an exceptionally brilliant one. In
his "Story of My Calamities" ( Historia Calamitatum) he tells us
how pupils flocked to him from every country in Europe, a
statement which is more than corroborated by Ihe authority of
his contemporaries. He was, In fact, the idol of Paris;
eloquent, vivacious, handsome, possessed of an unusually rich
voice, full of confidence in his own power to please, he had, as
he tells us, the whole world at his feet. That Abelard was
unduly conscious of these advantages is admitted by his most
ardent admirers; indeed, in the "Story of My Calamities," he
confesses that at that period of his life he was filled with
vanity and pride. To these faults he attributes his downfall,
which was as swift and tragic as was everything, seemingly, in
his meteoric career. He tells us in graphic language the tale
which has become part of the classic literature of the
love-theme, how he fell in love with Heloise, niece of Canon
Fulbert; he spares us none of the details of the story, recounts
all the circumstances of its tragic ending, the brutal vengeance
of the Canon, the flight of Heloise to Pallet, where their son,
whom he named Astrolabius, was born, the secret wedding, the
retirement of Heloise to the nunnery of Argenteuil, and his
abandonment of his academic career. He was at the time a cleric
in minor orders, and had naturally looked forward to a
distinguished career as an ecclesiastical teacher. After his
downfall, he retired to the Abbey of St. Denis, and, Heloise
having taken the veil at Argenteuil, he assumed the habit of a
Benedictine monk at the royal Abbey of St. Denis. He who had
considered himself "the only surviving philosopher in the whole
world" was willing to hide himself -- definitely, as he thought
-- in monastic solitude. But whatever dreams he may have had of
final peace in his monastic retreat were soon shattered. He
quarrelled with the monks of St. Denis, the occasion being his
irreverent criticism of the legend of their patron saint, and
was sent to a branch institution, a priory or cella, where, once
more, he soon attracted unfavourable attention by the spirit of
the teaching which he gave in philosophy and theology. "More
subtle and more learned than ever", as a contemporary (Otto of
Freising) describes him, he took up the former quarrel with
Anselm's pupils. Through their influence, his orthodoxy,
especially on the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, was impeached,
and he was summoned to appear before a council at Soissons, in
1121, presided over by the papal legate, Kuno, Bishop of
Praneste. While it is not easy to determine exactly what took
place at the Council, it is clear that there was no formal
condemnation of Abelard's doctrines, but that he was
nevertheless condemned to recite the Athanasian Creed, and to
burn his book on the Trinity. Besides, he was sentenced to
imprisonment in the Abbey of St. Medard, at the instance
apparently, of the monks of St. Denis, whose enmity, especially
that of their Abbot Adam, was unrelenting. In his despair, he
fled to a desert place in the neighbourhood of Troyes. Thither
pupils soon began to flock, huts and tents for their reception
were built, and an oratory erected, under the title "The
Paraclete", and there his former success as a teacher was
renewed.
After the death of Adam, Abbot of St. Denis, his successor,
Suger, absolved Abelard from censure, and thus restored him to
his rank as a monk. The Abbey of St. Gildas de Rhuys, near
Vannes, on the coast of Brittany, having lost its Abbot in 1125,
elected Abelard to fill his place. At the same time, the
community of Argenteuil was dispersed, and Heloise gladly
accepted the Oratory of the Paraclete, where she became Abbess.
As Abbot of St. Gildas, Abelard had, according to his own
account, a very troublesome time. The monks, considering him too
strict, endeavoured in various ways to rid themselves of his
rule, and even attempted to poison him. They finally drove him
from the monastery. Retaining the title of Abbot, he resided for
some time in the neighbourhood of Nantes and later (probably in
1136) resumed his career as teacher at Paris and revived, to
some extent, the renown of the days when, twenty years earlier,
he gathered "all Europe" to hear his lectures. Among his pupils
at this time were Arnold of Brescia and John of Salisbury. Now
begins the last act in the tragedy of Abelard's life, in which
St. Bernard plays a conspicuous part. The monk of Clairvaux, the
most powerful man in the Church in those days, was alarmed at
the heterodoxy of Abelard's teaching, and questioned the
Trinitarian doctrine contained in Abelard's writings. There were
admonitions on the one side and defiances on the other; St.
Bernard, having first warned Abelard in private, proceeded to
denounce him to the bishops of France; Abelard, underestimating
the ability and influence of his adversary, requested a meeting,
or council, of bishops, before whom Bernard and he should
discuss the points in dispute. Accordingly, a council was held
at Sens (the metropolitan see to which Paris was then suffragan)
in 1141. On the eve of the council a meeting of bishops was
held, at which Bernard was present, but not Abelard, and in that
meeting a number of propositions were selected from Abelard's
writings, and condemned. When, on the following morning, these
propositions were read in solemn council, Abelard, informed, so
it seems, of the proceedings of the evening before, refused to
defend himself, declaring that he appealed to Rome. Accordingly,
the propositions were condemned, but Abelard was allowed his
freedom. St. Bernard now wrote to the members of the Roman
Curia, with the result that Abelard had proceeded only as far as
Cluny on his way to Rome when the decree of Innocent II
confirming the sentence of the Council of Sens reached him. The
Venerable Peter of Cluny now took up his case, obtained from
Rome a mitigation of the sentence reconciled him with St.
Bernard, and gave him honourable and friendly hospitality at
Cluny. There Abelard spent the last years of his life, and there
at last he found the peace which he had elsewhere sought in
vain. He donned the habit of the monks of Cluny and became a
teacher in the school of the monastery. He died at
Chalon-sur-Saone in 1142, and was buried at the Paraclete. In
1817 his remains and those of Heloise were transferred to the
cemetery of Pere la Chaise, in Paris, where they now rest. For
our knowledge of the life of Abelard we rely chiefly on the
"Story of My Calamities", an autobiography written as a letter
to a friend, and evidently intended for publication. To this may
be added the letters of Abelard and Heloise, which were also
intended for circulation among Abelard's friends. The "Story"
was written about the year 1130, and the letters during the
following five or six years. In both the personal element must
of course, be taken into account. Besides these we have very
scanty material; a letter from Roscelin to Abelard, a letter of
Fulco of Deuil, the chronicle of Otto of Freising, the letters
of St. Bernard, and a few allusions in the writings of John of
Salisbury. Abelard's philosophical works are "Dialectica," a
logical treatise consisting of four books (of which the first is
missing); "Liber Divisionum et Definitionum" (edited by Cousin
as a fifth book of the "Dialectica"); Glosses on Porphyry,
Boeius, and the Aristotelian "Categories"; "Glossulae in
Porphyrium" (hitherto unpublished except in a French paraphrase
by Remusat); the fragment "De Generibus et Speciebus", ascribed
to Abelard by Cousin; a moral treatise "Scito Teipsum, seu
Ethica", first published by Pez in "Thes. Anecd. Noviss". All of
these, with the exception of the "Glossulae" and the "Ethica",
are to be found in Cousin's "Ouvrages inedits d'Abelard" (Paris,
1836). Abelard's theological works (published by Cousin, "Petri
Abselardi Opera", in 2 vols., Paris, 1849-59, also by Migne,
"Patr. Lat.", CLXXVIII) include "Sic et Non", consisting of
scriptural and patristic passages arranged for and against
various theological opinions, without any attempt to decide
whether the affirmative or the negative opinion is correct or
orthodox; "Tractatus de Unitate et Trinitate Divina", which was
condemned at the Council of Sens (discovered and edited by
Stoelzle, Freiburg, 1891); "Theologia Christiana," a second and
enlarged edition of the "Tractatus" (first published by Durand
and Martene "Thes. Nov.," 1717); "Introductio in Theologiam'
(more correctly, "Theologia"), of which the first part was
published by Duchesne in 1616; "Dialogus inter Philosophum,
Judaeum, et Christianum"; "Sententiae Petri Abaelardi",
otherwise called "Epitomi Theologiae Christianae", which is
seemingly a compilation by Abelard's pupils (first published by
Rheinwald, Berlin, 1535); and several exegetical works hymns,
sequences, etc. In philosophy Abelard deserves consideration
primarily as a dialectician. For him, as for all the scholastic
philosophers before the thirteenth century, philosophical
inquiry meant almost exclusively the discussion and elucidation
of the problems suggested by the logical treatises of Aristotle
and the commentaries thereon, chiefly the commentaries of
Porphyry and Boetius. Perhaps his most important contribution to
philosophy and theology is the method which he developed in his
"Sic et Non" (Yea and Nay), a method germinally contained in the
teaching of his predecessors, and afterwards brought to more
definite form by Alexander of Hales and St. Thomas Aquinas. It
consisted in placing before the student the reasons pro and
contra, on the principle that truth is to be attained only by a
dialectical discussion of apparently contradictory arguments and
authorities. In the problem of Universals, which occupied so
much of the attention of dialecticians in those days, Abelard
took a position of uncompromising hostility to the crude
nominalism of Roscelin on the one side, and to the exaggerated
realism of William of Champeaux on the other. What, precisely,
was his own doctrine on the question is a matter which cannot
with accuracy be determined. However, from the statements of his
pupil, John of Salisbury, it is clear that Abelard's doctrine,
while expressed in terms of a modified Nominalism, was very
similar to the moderate Realism which began to be official in
the schools about half a century after Abelard's death. In
ethics Abelard laid such great stress on the morality of the
intention as apparently to do away with the objective
distinction between good and evil acts. It is not the physical
action itself, he said, nor any imaginary injury to God, that
constitutes sin, but rather the psychological element in the
action, the intention of sinning, which is formal contempt of
God. With regard to the relation between reason and revelation,
between the sciences -- including philosophy -- and theology,
Abelard incurred in his own day the censure of mystic
theologians like St. Bernard, whose tendency was to disinherit
reason in favour of contemplation and ecstatic vision. And it is
true that if the principles "Reason aids Faith" and "Faith aids
Reason" are to be taken as the inspiration of scholastic
theology, Abelard was constitutionally inclined to emphasize the
former, and not lay stress on the latter. Besides, he adopted a
tone, and employed a phraseology, when speaking of sacred
subjects, which gave offence, and rightly, to the more
conservative of his contemporaries. Still, Abelard had good
precedent for his use of dialectic in the elucidation of the
mysteries of faith; he was by no means an innovator in this
respect; and though the thirteenth century, the golden age of
scholasticism, knew little of Abelard, it took up his method,
and with fearlessness equal to his, though without any of his
flippancy or irreverence, gave full scope to reason in the
effort to expound and defend the mysteries of the Christian
Faith. St. Bernard sums up the charges against Abelard when he
writes (Ep. cxcii) "Cum de Trinitate loquitur, sapit Arium; cum
do gratia, sapit Pelagium; cum de persona Christi, sapit
Nestorium", and there is no doubt that on these several heads
Abelard wrote and said many things which were open to objection
from the point of view of orthodoxy. That is to say, while
combating the opposite errors, he fell inadvertently into
mistakes which he himself did not recognize as Arianism,
Pelagianism, and Nestorianism, and which even his enemies could
characterize merely as savouring of Arianism, Pelagianism, and
Nestorianism. Abelard's influence on his immediate successors
was not very great, owing partly to his conflict with the
ecclesiastical authorities, and partly to his personal defects,
more especially his vanity and pride, which must have given the
impression that he valued truth less than victory.
His influence on the philosophers and theologians of the
thirteenth century was, however, very great. It was exercised
chiefly through Peter Lombard, his pupil, and other framers of
the "Sentences." Indeed, while one must be careful to discount
the exaggerated encomiums of Compayre, Cousin, and others, who
represent Abelard as the first modern, the founder of the
University of Paris, etc., one is justified in regarding him, in
spite of his faults of character and mistakes of judgment, as an
important contributor to scholastic method, an enlightened
opponent of obscurantism, and a continuator of that revival of
learning which occurred in the Carolingian age, and of which
whatever there is of science, literature, and speculation in the
early Middle Ages is the historical development.
WILLIAM TURNER
Louis Abelly
Louis Abelly
Louis Abelly (1603-91) was Vicar-General of Bayonne, a parish
priest in Paris, and subsequently Bishop of Rodez in 1664, but
in 1666 abdicated and attached himself to St. Vincent de Paul in
the House of St. Lazare, Paris. His ascetical works reveal his
deep and sincere piety. He was a bitter foe of the Jansenists,
chiefly of St. Cyran, against whom he directed his Life of St.
Vincent de Paul, a work which Hurter describes as "full of
unction." His Medulla Theologica went through many editions, and
is characterized by its "solidity, directness, and usefulness."
According to St. Alphonsus, Abelly is "a classic in
probabilism." His Defense de la hierarchie de l'Eglise was
directed against an anonymous Gallican writer. He wrote also two
Enchiridions, one for bishops, another for priests; a treatise
entitled De l'obeissance et soumission due au Pape; and another
called Traite des Heresies. Replying to a Jansenist work known
as Monita Salutaria, he published his Sentiments des SS. Peres,
touchant les excellences et les prerogatives de la T.S. Vierge.
HURTER, Nomenclator, VII, 586.
T.J. CAMPBELL
Abenakis
Abenakis
A confederation of Algonquin tribes, comprising the Penobscots,
Passamaquoddies, Norridgewocks, and others, formerly occupying
what is now Maine, and southern New Brunswick. Their territory
joined that of the Micmacs on the northeast, and that of the
Penobscots on the southwest. Their speech is a dialect of the
Micmac language of the North American Indians. They took sides
with the French and maintained an increasing hostility against
encroachments of the English. When their principal town,
Norridgewock, was taken, and their missionary, Rasle, was killed
(1724), the greater part of them removed to St. Francis, in the
province of Quebec, Canada, whither other refugees from the New
England tribes had preceded them. They are now represented by
the Amalectites on the St. John River, New Brunswick, and Quebec
(820); the Passamaquoddies, on the bay of that name, in Maine
(300); the Penobscots, at Old Town, Maine (400), and the Abnakis
at St. Francis and Becancourt, Quebec (430). There are a dozen
variations of the name Abenakis, such as Abenaquiois, Abakivis,
Quabenakionek, Wabenakies, etc. They are described in the
"Jesuit Relations" as not cannibals, and as docile, ingenious,
temperate in the use of liquor, and not profane. Their language
has been preserved in the monumental dictionary of Sebastian
Rasle. After the unsuccessful attempt of de la Saussaye, in
1613, to plant a colony as Mount Desert -- where the Jesuit
Fathers Biard, Masse, and Quentin proposed to evangelize the
Indians -- the Capuchins and the Recollects, aided by secular
priests from the seminary of Quebec, undertook the work, but met
with indifferent success. The Jesuit Druillettes was sent to
them in 1646, but remained only a short time. Subsequently,
other missionaries like Bigot, Thury, and de la Chasse laboured
among them, but three years after the murder of Father Rasle,
that is to say in 1727, when Fathers Syvesme and Lauverjat
withdrew, there was no resident pastor in Maine, though the
Indians were visited by priests from time to time. They remained
unalterably attached to the Faith, and during the Revolution,
when Washington sent to ask them to join with the colonies
against England, they assented on condition that a Catholic
priest should be sent to them. Some of the chaplains of the
French fleet communicated with them, promising to comply with
their request, but beyond that nothing was done. At the present
time there are Indian missions for the remnants of the tribe at
Calais, Eastport, and Old Town.
Jesuit Relations, passim; Shea, Catholic Church in Colonial
Days, 1521-1763 (New York, 1886); Maurault, Hist. des Abenakis
depuis 1605 a nos jours (Quebec, 1866).
T.J. CAMPBELL
Abraham-Ben-Meir Aben-Ezra
Abraham-ben-Meir Aben-Ezra
(Or IBN 'EZRA).
A celebrated Spanish Rabbi, born at Toledo in 1092; died on his
Journey from Rome, or Rodez, to his native land, 23 January,
1167. He excelled in philosophy, astronomy, medicine, poetry,
linguistics, and exegesis. He was called the Wise, the Great,
the Admirable Doctor. Having to leave his native city on account
of the vexations inflicted on the Jews, he travelled through a
great part of Europe, through Egypt and Palestine. Rome, London,
Narbonne, Mantua, Verona, and Rodez are some of the places he
visited. His chief work is his commentary on the Sacred Books,
which is nearly complete, the Books of Paralipomenon being the
only ones missing. His commentary on the Pentateuch appeared in
several revisions. In his commentary Aben-Ezra adheres to the
literal sense of the Sacred Books, avoiding Rabbinic allegories
and Cabbalistic extravagances, though he remains faithful to the
Jewish traditions. This does not prevent him from exercising an
independent criticism, which, according to some writers, even
borders on rationalism. But in his other works he follows the
Cabbalistic views. The Book of the Secrets of the Law, The
Mystery of the Form of the Letters, The Enigma of the Quiescent
Letters, The Book of the Name, The Book of the Balance of the
Sacred Language, The Book of Purity [of the Language] are
perhaps the most important of his works of this kind. They were
written during his life of travel, and they reflect the
unsteadiness of his outward circumstances. Taking Aben-Ezra's
work as a whole, it consists rather in popularizing Rabbinic
Andalusian ideas on Latin and Saxon soil than in producing
original thought.
LEVESQUE, in VIG., Dict. de la Bible (Paris 1895); WELTE, in
Kirchenlex. (Freiburg, 1882); Jewish Encyclopedia, VI, 520 sq.
(New York, 1904).
A.J. MAAS
Inscription of Abercius
Inscription of Abercius
A Greek hagiographical text, which has, however, undergone
alterations, and a Greek inscription of the second century have
made known to us a certain Abercius, Bishop of Hieropolis, in
Phrygia, who, about the middle of the century in question, left
his episcopal city and visited Rome. On his way home he
travelled through Syria and Mesopotamia, and was received with
great honours in various places. He died shortly after his
return to Hieropolis, but not before he had composed his own
epitaph, conveying a most vivid impression of all he had admired
during his stay in Rome. This epitaph may well have inspired the
Life of Abercius such as it has come down to us, since all its
details may be explained by the hints contained in the
inscription, or else belong to the common foundation of all
legends of saints. The Life, as a matter of fact, includes a
transcription of the epitaph. Tillemont was greatly struck by
the ideas therein expressed, and Pitra endeavoured to prove its
authenticity and its important bearing on Christian symbolism.
Renan regarded both the Life and inscription as fanciful
compositions, but in 1882 an English traveller, W. Ramsay,
discovered at Kelendres, near Synnada, in Phrygia Salutaris
(Asia Minor), a Christian stele (inscribed slab) bearing the
date of the year 300 of the Phrygian era (A.D. 216). The
inscription in question recalled the memory of a certain
Alexander, son of Anthony. De Rossi and Duchesne at once
recognized in it phrases similar to those in the epitaph of
Abercius. On comparison it was found that the inscription in
memory of Alexander corresponded, almost word for word, with the
first and last verses of the epitaph of the Bishop of
Hieropolis; all the middle part was missing. Mr. Ramsay, on a
second visit to the site of Hieropolis, in 1883, discovered two
new fragments covered with inscriptions, built into the masonry
of the public baths. These fragments, which are now in the
Vatican Christian Museum, filled out the middle part of the
stele inscribed with the epitaph of Abercius. It now became
possible, with the help of the text preserved in the Life, to
restore the original text of the epitaph with practical
certainty. Certain lacunae, letters effaced or cut off by breaks
in the stone, have been the subject of profound discussions,
resulting in a text which may henceforth be looked on as
settled, and which it may be useful to give here. The capital
letters at the beginning and end of the inscription represent
the parts found on the inscription of Alexander, the son of
Anthony, those of the middle part are the remaining fragments of
the epitaph of Abercius, while the small letters give the
reading according to the manuscripts of the Life:
"The citizen of a chosen city, this [monument] I made [while]
living, that there I might have in time a resting-place of my body,
[I] being by name Abercius, the disciple of a holy shepherd who
feeds flocks of sheep [both] on mountains and on plains, who has
great eyes that see everywhere. For this [shepherd] taught me [that
the] book [of life] is worthy of belief. And to Rome he sent me to
contemplate majesty, and to see a queen golden-robed and
golden-sandalled; there also I saw a people bearing a shining mark.
And I saw the land of Syria and all [its] cities Nisibis [I saw]
when I passed over Euphrates. But everywhere I had brethren. I had
Paul. . . . Faith everywhere led me forward, and everywhere provided
as my food a fish of exceeding great size, and perfect, which a holy
virgin drew with her hands from a fountain and this it [faith] ever
gives to its friends to eat, it having wine of great virtue, and
giving it mingled with bread. These things I, Abercius, having been
a witness [of them] told to be written here. Verily I was passing
through my seventy-second year. He that discerneth these things,
every fellow-believer [namely], let him pray for Abercius. And no
one shall put another grave over my grave; but if he do, then shall
he pay to the treasury of [the] Romans two thousand pieces of gold
and to my good native city of Hieropolis one thousand pieces of
gold."
The interpretation of this inscription has stimulated ingenious
efforts and very animated controversies. In 1894 G. Ficker,
supported by O. Hirschfeld, strove to prove that Abercius was a
priest of Cybele. In 1895 A. Harnack offered an explanation
which was sufficiently obscure, making Abercius the
representative of an ill-defined religious syncretism
arbitrarily combined in such a fashion as to explain all
portions of the inscription which were otherwise inexplicable.
In 1896, Dieterich made Abercius a priest of Attis. These
plausible theories have been refuted by several learned
archaeologists, especially by De Rossi, Duchesne, and Cumont.
Nor is there any further need to enter into the questions raised
in one quarter or another; the following conclusions are
indisputably historical. The epitaph of Abercius is generally,
and with good reason, regarded as older than that of Alexander,
the son of Anthony, i.e. prior to the year of Our Lord 216. The
subject of it may be identified with a writer named Abercius
Marcellus, author of a work against the Montanists, some
fragments of which have been preserved by Eusebius. As the
treatise in question was written about the year 193, the epitaph
may be assigned to the last years of the second, or to the
beginning of the third, century. The writer was bishop of a
little town, the name of which is wrongly given in the Life,
since he belongs to Hieropolis in Phrygia Salutaris, and not to
Hierapolis in Phrygia Pacatiensis. The proof of this fact given
by Duchesne is all that could be wished for. The text of the
inscription itself is of the greatest possible importance in
connection with the symbolism of the early Church. The poem of
sixteen verses which forms the epitaph shows plainly that the
language used is one not understood by all; Let the brother who
shall understand this pray for Abercius. The bishop's journey to
Rome is merely mentioned, but on his way home he gives us the
principal stages of his itinerary. He passed along the Syrian
coast and, possibly, came to Antioch, thence to Nisibis,
after-having traversed the whole of Syria, while his return to
Hieropolis may have been by way of Edessa. The allusion to St.
Paul the Apostle, which a gap in the text renders
indecipherable, may originally have told how the traveller
followed on his way back to his country the stages of St. Paul's
third missionary journey, namely: Issus, Tarsus, Derbe, Iconium,
Antioch in Pisidia, and Apamea Cibotus, which would bring him
into the heart of Phrygia. The inscription bears witness of no
slight value to the importance of the Church of Rome in the
second century. A mere glance at the text allows us to note: (1)
The evidence of baptism which marks the Christian people with
its dazzling seal; (2) The spread of Christianity, whose members
Abercius meets with everywhere; (3) The receiving of Jesus
Christ, the Son of God and of Mary, in the Eucharist, (4) under
the species of Bread and Wine. The liturgical cultus of Abercius
presents no point of special interest; his name appears for the
first time in the Greek menologies and synaxaries of the tenth
century, but is not found in the Martyrology of St. Jerome.
PITRA, in the Spicilegium Solesmense (Paris, 1855, III, 533; IV,
483); DUCHESNE, Abercius, eveque d'Hieropolis, in the Revue des
questions historiques (1883), XXXIV, 533; LECLERCQ, in Dict. d
arch ol. chr t. et de liturgie, I, 66- 87; LIGHTFOOT, Apostolic
Fathers (London, 1889), II, i, 492-501.
H. LECLERCQ.
John Abercromby
John Abercromby
Died 1561. During the Scottish Reformation we know that the
Catholic clergy were treated with great violence, but
particulars of their misfortunes are hard to find. Thomas
Dempster, a diligent writer of the next century, whose accuracy,
however, cannot always be trusted, in his Historia Gentis
Scotorum (Edinburgh, 1829), 28, names Abercromby as having lost
his life from such violence. He adds that he thinks the sufferer
was a Benedictine, and that he had written in behalf of the
Faith.
JOHN HUNGERFORD POLLEN
Robert Abercromby
Robert Abercromby
(Sometimes known as Sanders and as Robertson).
A Jesuit missionary in Scotland in the time of the persecutions,
born 1532; died at Braunsberg, in Prussia, 27 April, 1613. He
was brought into prominence chiefly by the fact that he
converted the Queen of James I of England, when that monarch was
as yet James IV of Scotland. The Queen was Anne of Denmark, and
her father, an ardent Lutheran, has stipulated that she should
have the right to practice her own religion in Scotland, and for
that purpose sent with her a chaplain named John Lering who,
however, shortly after his arrival, became a Calvinist. The
Queen, who abhorred Calvinism, asked some of the Catholic nobles
for advice, and it was suggested to call Father Abercromby, who,
with some other Jesuits, was secretly working among the Scotch
Catholics and winning many illustrious converts to the Church.
Though brought up a Lutheran, Queen Anne had in her youth lived
with a niece of the Emperor Charles V, and not only knew
something of the Faith, but had frequently been present at Mass
with her former friend. Abercromby was introduced into the
palace, instructed the Queen in the Catholic religion, and
received her into the Church. This was about the year 1600. As
to the date there is some controversy. Andrew Lang, who merely
quotes Mac Quhirrie as to the fact of the conversion, without
mentioning Abercromby, puts it as occurring in 1598.
Intelligence of it at last came to the ears of the King, who,
instead of being angry, warned her to keep it secret, as her
conversion might imperil his crown. He even went as far as to
appoint Abercromby Superintendent of the Royal Falconry, in
order that he might remain near the Queen. Up to the time that
James succeeded to the crown of England, Father Abercromby
remained at the Scottish Court, celebrating Mass in secret, and
giving Holy Communion nine or ten times to his neophyte. When
the King and Queen were crowned sovereigns of Great Britain,
Anne gave proof of her sincerity by absolutely refusing to
receive the Protestant sacrament, declaring that she preferred
to forfeit her crown rather than take part in what she
considered a sacrilegious profanation. Of this, Lang, in his
"History of Scotland", says nothing. She made several
ineffectual attempts to convert the King. Abercromby remained in
Scotland for some time, but as a price of 10,000 crowns was put
upon his head he came to England, only to find that the King's
kindly dispositions toward him had undergone a change. The
alleged discovery of a Gunpowder Plot in 1605, and the attempts
made to implicate the Jesuits in the conspiracy had excited in
the mind of the King feelings of bitter hostility to the
Society. He ordered a strict search to be made for Abercromby,
who consequently left the country and betook himself to
Braunsberg, in Eastern Prussia, where he died, in his
eighty-first year.
Bellesheim, Hist, of the Cath. Church in Scotland, VIII, 346;
Rostowski, Lituanic, S. J., Hist., 236; Abercromby's Narrative
in the Biblioth. Nation., Paris, Fonds latins, 6051, fol. 50.
T.J. CAMPBELL
The Diocese of Aberdeen
The Diocese of Aberdeen
(Scotland).
A see was founded in 1063 at Mortlach by Bl. Beyn. The earliest
mention of the old See of Aberdeen is in the charter of the
foundation, by the Earl of Buchan, of the Church of Deer (c.
1152), which is witnessed by Nectan, Bishop of Aberdeen. But the
first authentic record of the see is in the Bull of Adrian IV
(1157), confirming to Edward, Bishop of Aberdeen, the churches
of Aberdeen and St. Machar, with the town of Old Aberdeen and
other lands. The granite cathedral was built between 1272 and
1277. Bishop Thomas Spence founded a Franciscan house in 1480,
and King's College was founded at Old Aberdeen by Bishop
Elphinstone, for eight prebendaries, chapter, sacristan,
organist, and six choristers, in 1505. The see was transferred
to Old Aberdeen about 1125, and continued there until 1577,
having had in that time a list of twenty-nine bishops. From
1653, when the Scottish clergy were incorporated into a
missionary body by the Congregation of the Propaganda, until
1695, the Catholics of Scotland were governed by
prefects-apostolic. Then followed vicars-apostolic until 4
March, 1878, when Leo XIII, in the first year of his
pontificate, restored the hierarchy of Scotland by the Bull Ex
supremo Apostolatus apice, and Vicar-Apostolic John MacDonald
was translated to the restored See of Aberdeen as its first
bishop.
The Bull made Aberdeen one of the four suffragan sees of the
Archbishopric of St. Andrews and Edinburgh, and defined as its
territory "the counties of Aberdeen, Kincardine, Banff, Elgin or
Moray, Nairn, Ross (except Lewis in the Hebrides), Cromarty,
Sutherland, Caithness, the Orkney and Shetland Islands, and that
portion of Inverness which lies to the north of a straight line
drawn from the most northerly point of Loch Luing to the eastern
boundary of the said county of Inverness, where the counties of
Aberdeen and Banff join." In 1906, out of a population of over
800,000 there were nearly 4,000 Catholics; 48 secular priests;
24 regulars; 57 churches, chapels, and stations; 1 college; 1
industrial school for girls; 1 orphanage for boys; 1 orphanage
for girls. There are also Benedictine nuns, Poor Sisters of
Nazareth, Franciscan Sisters, Religious of the Sacred Heart, and
Sisters of Mercy. There have been four Bishops of Aberdeen since
the restoration, the present incumbent, the Rt. Rev. AEneas
Chisholm, having been consecrated 24 February, 1899. There is a
Benedictine Abbey at Fort Augustus, at which the restored
hierarchy met in a Provincial Council, August, 1886, under the
presidency of the Archbishop of St. Andrews, three hundred and
twenty-six years after the downfall of the Faith in Scotland.
The Provincial Council of 1 March, 1559, at Edinburgh, under
Archbishop Hamilton, was the last council before this, and that
had adjourned after appointing Septuagesima Sunday of 1560, for
the next meeting of the synod. Fort Augustus was raised to the
rank of an abbey, immediately subject to the Holy See, by a
brief of Leo XIII, 12 December, 1882. The munificence of Lord
Lovat and other liberal benefactors called it into being.
The Catholic Directory (London, 1906); BELLESHEIM, History of
the Catholic Church in Scotland (London, 1887, tr. HUNTERBLAIR),
I, 239, 425, passim.
JOHN J. A' BECKET.
The University of Aberdeen
The University of Aberdeen
The founder of this, one of the three universities established
in Scotland in Catholic times, was William Elphinstone, who was
Bishop of Aberdeen from 1483 to 1514. Early in his episcopate a
petition had been sent to Rome in the name of King James IV, but
probably framed by Elphinstone himself, representing the
ignorance which prevailed in the greater part of his diocese,
and in the northern districts of the kingdom generally. The
Papal Bull for the erection of Aberdeen University was issued 24
February, 1491 (1495 according to our modern way of reckoning).
Bishop Elphinstone had been a professor at Paris and at Orleans
for nine years, and it was on the University of Paris, both as
to form and organization, and also in its wide scope of general
mental training, that the new establishment was modelled by its
founder. In 1495 Elphinstone procured a royal charter assigning
to academic purposes certain ecclesiastical revenues and
conceding to the new university all the privileges enjoyed by
the universities of Paris, St. Andrews, and Glasgow. Hector
Boece, professor of philosophy at Paris, was appointed first
principal of the university, which was established in what is
now known as Old Aberdeen, near the ancient Cathedral of St.
Machar. In 1593, George Keith, fifth Earl Marshal of Scotland,
founded a second university (hence called Marischal College) in
the new town of Aberdeen, and granted to it the buildings of the
dispossessed Black (Dominican), Grey (Franciscan), and White
(Carmelite) Friars as endowment. The two universities were
united for a time (from 1640 until after the Restoration), and
many schemes for their permanent reunion were promulgated in the
18th century; but it was not until 1859 that their fusion was
finally affected, after much local opposition. New
professorships and lectureships have been recently founded, and
at Marischal College, now the seat of the faculties of science,
law, and medicine, a scheme of building extension on a great
scale is at present (1905) being carried out. The number of
students is about 700, and the number of professors 24.
RASHDALE, History of Universities (1805) II, 309; INNES,
Sketches of Early Scotch History (Edinburgh, 1871), 254.
D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR
Moritz von Aberle
Moritz von Aberle
Catholic theologian, b. at Rottum, near Biberach, in Swabia, 25
April, 1819; d. at Tuebingen, 3 November, 1875. He became
professor in the Obergymnasium, at Ehingen, in 1845; director of
the Wilhelmstift, in 1848; professor of moral theology and New
Testament exegesis in the university at Tuebingen, in 1850, a
position he retained till the day of his death. He had a
considerable number of pupils in both branches, but he was
especially devoted to Scriptural studies. He emphasized the
activity of the human bearers of revelation, without changing it
into a purely natural process. The results of his investigations
he published in a series of articles contributed to the
Tuebingen theol. Quartalschrift, 1851-72, and to the Bonner
theol. Lit.-Blatt. The main thoughts of these articles were
collected and published under the title, Introduction to the New
Testament, by Dr. Paul Schanz (Freiburg, 1877). Aberle's view
that the Gospels and the Book of Acts are apologetic writings,
meeting certain needs of the Apostolic times, cannot be
sustained. He took also an active part in the struggle for
ecclesiastical liberty in Wuertemberg, and his strong newspaper
articles forced the State to arrange Church matters on a
tolerable basis.
HIMPEL, Theologische Quartalschrift, 1876, 177-228; WERNER,
Geschichte der neuzeitl. christlich-kirchl. Apologetik
(Schaffhausen, 1867).
A.J. MAAS
The Legend of Abgar
The Legend of Abgar
The historian Eusebius records a tradition (H.E., I, xii), which
he himself firmly believes, concerning a correspondence that
took place between Our Lord and the local potentate at Edessa.
Three documents relate to this correspondence:
+ the letter of Abgar to Our Lord;
+ Our Lord's answer;
+ a picture of Our Lord, painted from life.
This legend enjoyed great popularity, both in the East and in
the West, during the Middle Ages: Our Lord's letter was copied
on parchment, marble, and metal, and used as a talisman or an
amulet. In the age of Eusebius the original letters, written in
Syriac, were thought to be kept in the archives of Edessa. At
the present day we possess not only a Syriac text, but an
Armenian translation as well, two independent Greek versions,
shorter than the Syriac, and several inscriptions on stone, all
of which are discussed in two articles in the "Dictionnaire
d'archeologie chretienne et de liturgies" cols. 88 sq. and 1807
sq. The only two works to be consulted in regard to this
literary problem are the "Ecclesiastical History" of Eusebius,
and the "Teaching of Addai," which professes to belong to the
Apostolic age.
The legend, according to these two works, runs as follows:
Abgar, king of Edessa, afflicted with an incurable sickness, has
heard the fame of the power and miracles of Jesus and writes to
Him, praying Him to come and heal him. Jesus declines, but
promises to send a messenger, endowed with His power, namely
Thaddeus (or Addai), one of the seventy-two Disciples. The
letters of Our Lord and of the king of Edessa vary in the
version given in Eusebius and in that of the "Teaching of
Addai." That which follows is taken from the Teaching of Addai,"
as being less accessible than the History of Eusebius:
Abgar Ouchama to Jesus, the Good Physician Who has appeared in the
country of Jerusalem, greeting:
I have heard of Thee, and of Thy healing; that Thou dost not use
medicines or roots, but by Thy word openest (the eyes) of the blind,
makest the lame to walk, cleansest the lepers, makest the deaf to
hear; how by Thy word (also) Thou healest (sick) spirits and those
who are tormented with lunatic demons, and how, again, Thou raisest
the dead to life. And , learning the wonders that Thou doest, it was
borne in upon me that (of two things, one): either Thou hast come
down from heaven, or else Thou art the Son of God, who bringest all
these things to pass. Wherefore I write to Thee, and pray that thou
wilt come to me, who adore Thee, and heal all the ill that I suffer,
according to the faith I have in Thee. I also learn that the Jews
murmur against Thee, and persecute Thee, that they seek to crucify
Thee, and to destroy Thee. I possess but one small city, but it is
beautiful, and large enough for us two to live in peace.
When Jesus had received the letter, in the house of the high
priest of the Jews, He said to Hannan, the secretary, "Go thou,
and say to thy master, who hath sent thee to Me: 'Happy art thou
who hast believed in Me, not having seen me, for it is written
of me that those who shall see me shall not believe in Me, and
that those who shall not see Me shall believe in Me. As to that
which thou hast written, that I should come to thee, (behold)
all that for which I was sent here below is finished, and I
ascend again to My Father who sent Me, and when I shall have
ascended to Him I will send thee one of My disciples, who shall
heal all thy sufferings, and shall give (thee) health again, and
shall convert all who are with thee unto life eternal. And thy
city shall be blessed forever, and the enemy shall never
overcome it.'" According to Eusebius, it was not Hannan who
wrote answer, but Our Lord Himself.
A curious legendary growth has sprung up from this imaginary
occurrence. The nature of Abgar's sickness has been gravely
discussed, to the credit of various writers' imaginations, so
holding that it was gout, others leprosy; the former saying that
it had lasted seven years, the latter discovering that the
sufferer had contracted his disease during a stay in Persia.
Other chroniclers, again, maintain that the letter was written
on parchment, though some favour papyrus. The crucial passage in
Our Lord's letter, however, is that which promises the city of
Edessa victory over all enemies. It gave the little town a
popularity which vanished on the day that it fell into the hands
of conquerors. It was a rude shock to those who believed the
legend; they were more ready to attribute the fall of the city
to God's anger against the inhabitants than to admit the failure
of a safeguard which was no less trusted to at that time than in
the past.
The fact related in the correspondence has long since ceased to
be of any historical value. The text is borrowed in two places
from that of the Gospel, which of itself is sufficient to
disprove the authenticity of the letter. Moreover, the
quotations are made not from the Gospels proper, but from the
famous concordance of Tatian, compiled in the second century,
and known as the "Diatessaron", thus fixing the date of the
legend as approximately the middle of the third century. In
addition, however, to the importance which it attained in the
apocryphal cycle, the correspondence of King Abgar also gained a
place in liturgy. The decree, "De libris non recipiendis", of
the pseudo-Gelasius, places the letter among the apocrypha,
which may, possibly, be an allusion to its having been
interpolated among the officially sanctioned lessons of the
liturgy. The Syrian liturgies commemorate the correspondence of
Abgar during Lent. The Celtic liturgy appears to have attached
importance to the legend; the "Liber Hymnorum", a manuscript
preserved at Trinity College, Dublin (E. 4, 2), gives two
collects on the lines of the letter to Abgar. Nor is it by any
means impossible that this letter, followed by various prayers,
may have formed a minor liturgical office in certain churches.
The account given by Adda contains a detail which may here be
briefly referred to. Hannan, who wrote at Our Lord's dictation,
was archivist at Edessa and painter to King Abgar. He had been
charged to paint a portrait of Our Lord, a task which he carried
out, bringing back with him to Edessa a picture which came an
object of general veneration, but which, after a while, was said
to have been painted by Our Lord Himself. Like the letter, the
portrait was destined be the nucleus of a legendary growth; the
"Holy Face of Edessa" was chiefly famous in the Byzantine world.
A bare indication, however, of this fact must suffice here,
since the legend of the Edessa portrait forms part of the
extremely difficult and obscure subject of the iconography of
Christ, and of the pictures of miraculous origin called
acheiropoietoe ("made without hands").
H. LECLERCQ
Abiathar
Abiathar
(Hebrew ebhyathar, Father of plenty, or, the great one is
father).
Descendant of Achimelech, Achitob, Phinees, Heli, Ithamar,
Aaron, a high priest who escaped from the slaughter at Nob, went
to David in his banishment (I K., xxii, 20-23,; xxiii, 6) and
assisted him with his advice (I K., xxiii, 9-14; xxx, 7).
Together with the high priest Sadoc, he assisted at the
transportation of the ark to Jerusalem (I Par., xv, 11, 12), and
tried to follow David in his flight (II K., xv, 24), but instead
aided him by counsel (II K., xv, 29-36; xvii, 15 sq.; xix, 11; I
Par., xxvii, 34). He favoured Adonias (III K., i, 7, 19, 25,
42), and was banished by Solomon to Anathoth (III K., ii,
22-27), thus completing the ruin of the house of Ithamar (I K.,
ii, 30-36; iii, 10-14). As to II K., viii, 17, see Commentaries.
A.J. MAAS
Abila
Abila
A titular see of Phoenicia, in the region of Mt. Libanus, now
Suk Wady Barada, near Damascus, and the capital and stronghold
of Abilina (Luke 3:1).
The Abbey of Abingdon
The Abbey of Abingdon
This abbey, located in the County of Berkshire, England, was
founded A.D. 675, by Cyssa, Viceroy of Kinwine, King of the West
Saxons, or by his nephew Heane, in honour of the Virgin Mary,
for twelve Benedictine monks. Endowed by successive West Saxon
kings, it grew in importance and wealth until its destruction by
the Danes in the reign of King Alfred, and the sequestration of
its estates by Alfred because the monks had not made him a
sufficient requital for vanquishing their enemies. There is a
collection of 136 charters granted to this Abbey by various
Saxon Kings (Cottonian MSS. apud; Dugdale). Among its abbots
were St. Ethelwold, afterwards Bishop of Winchester (954), and
Richard de Hendred, for whose-appointment the King's consent was
obtained in 1262. It is recorded of him that he wore both mitre
and pontificals on the Feast of Holy Trinity in 1268. Hence
Willis supposes that lie was the first abbot to possess the
privilege; He was present at the (Council of Lyons in 1272; The
last Abbot of Abingdon was Thomas Pentecost ( alias Rowland),
who was among the first to acknowledge the Royal Supremacy. With
the rest of his community he signed the surrender of his
monastery in 1538, receiving the manor of Cumnor for life or
until he had preferment to the extent of -L-223 per annum. The
revenues of the Abbey (26 Hen. VIII) were valued at -L-1876,
10s, 9d.
Chronicon Monasterii de Abingdon (ed. Stevenson); DUGDALE,
Monasticon Anglicanum; LYSONS, Magna Brittania (Berkshire);
COOPER-KING, History of Berkshire, s.v.
FRANCIS AVELING
Thomas Abington
Thomas Abington
(Or HABINGTON).
An English antiquarian, b. 1560; d. 1647. His father, who was
treasurer to Queen Elizabeth, had him educated at Oxford, Reims,
and Paris. For six years he was imprisoned in the Tower, being
accused, with his brother Edward, of having taken part in the
plot of Babington to effect the escape of Mary Queen of Scots.
On his release he retired to Hinlip Castle in Lancaster, where
he gave asylum to the Jesuit Fathers, Henry Garnett and
Oldcorne, accused of complicity in the Gunpowder Plot. For this
he was condemned to death, but through the intervention of his
son-in-law, Lord Monteagle, the sentence was commuted to exile.
His "History of Edward IV" was published after his death and
also an English translation of "Gildas" (London, 1638). He also
left in manuscript a "History of the Cathedral of Worcester" and
"Researches into the Antiquities of Worcester".
GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. English Catholics, s.v.
THOMAS WALSH
Abipones
Abipones
This Indian tribe, linguistically of Guaycuru stock, formerly
roaming the east side of the Parana river, was finally
concentrated between the Rio Bermejo on the north, the Rio
Salado on the south, and the Parana on the east, on the soil of
the present Argentine Republic. Their customs appear to have
been the same of those of South American tribes in general;
clanship, an elaborate animism, or fetishism, complete sway of
the medicine-men over private and tribal matters; chiefs
eligible, or imposed through the impression created by casual
achievements combined with wiles of the Shamans. Their weapons
were lances, bows, and arrows, though the lance was preferred.
They had most of the customs of the Guaycuru, including the
couvade. In 1641 the Abipones had already obtained the horse
from the Spanish settlers. At that time they were, according to
tradition, still north of the Rio Bermejo, whence it is likely
they were driven south by the Tobas, a warlike tribe of their
own linguistic stock. Their horses, thriving on the grassy
plains, soon made the Abipones very dangerous to Spanish
colonization by means of raids on the settlements, by which they
increased their own stocks of horses and cattle. In the first
half of the eighteenth century, the Jesuits undertook the task
of taming these unruly centaurs of the "Grand Chaco". With great
difficulty, Fathers Casado, Sanchez, and especially Father
Martin Dobrizhoffer, who was for eighteen years a missionary in
Paraguay, succeeded in forming several settlements of
Christianized Abipones near the Parana. These colonies were
maintained in spit of the turbulent spirit of the neophytes,
which caused incessant trouble with Spanish settlers, and above
all, in spite of the murderous onslaughts made by the Tobas and
Moobobis, strong and warlike tribes, upon the missions, when
these showed signs of material prosperity. The expulsion of the
Jesuits from Paraguay in 1768 and 1769 was the deathknell of the
Abipones. The Tobas and Moobobis destroyed them in the course of
less than half a century. It is to the work of Father Martin
Dobrizhoffer, S.J., that we know most of our knowledge of the
Abipones.
Dobrizhoffer, Historia de Abiponibus, equestri, bellicosaque
Paraguariae natione, etc. (Vienna, 1784; German version, 1784;
English tr. 1822). References to the language are found in
Hervas, Origine, Formazione, Mecanismo, ed Armonia degli Idiomi
(Cesena, 1785); Id., Vocabulario poliglotto (1787); Saggio
practico delle Lingue etc. (1787); Adrian Balbi, Atlas
ethnographique du globe (Paris, 1826); Alcide d'Orbrigny,
L'Homme americain (Paris, 1839); Brinton, The American Race.
AD. F. BANDELIER
Abisai
Abisai
( Abhishay, abhshay; Sept. Abessa, Abisai).
Son of David's sister Sarvia, and brother of Joab, a most
valiant warrior (II K. xxiii, 18, 19; I Par., xi, 20, 21), and a
faithful friend of David in his struggles against Saul (I K.
xxvi, 6-9; II K. ii, 24; iii, 30), against the Ammonites,
Syrians, and Edomites (II K., viii, 13; x, 9-14; I Par., xviii,
12; xix, 11-15), against Absalom (II K. xvi, 9, 10; xix, 21, 22;
xviii, 2), Seba (II K., xx, 6), and the Philistines (II K., xxi,
15-17).
HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); PALIS in VIG., Dict. de
la Bible (Paris, 1895); WHITE in HAST., Dict. of the Bible (New
York, 1903).
A.J. MAAS
Abjuration
Abjuration
A denial, disavowal, or renunciation under oath. In common
ecclesiastical language this term is restricted to the
renunciation of heresy made by the penitent heretic on the
occasion of his reconciliation with the Church. The Church has
always demanded such renunciation, accompanied by appropriate
penance. In some cases the abjuration was the only ceremony
required; in others abjuration was followed by the imposition of
hands or by unction, or both by the laying on of hands and by
unction. St. Gregory the Great (A.D. 590-604) in a letter
(Epistolae, lib. XI, Ep. lxvii, P.L., Tom. LXXVII, Col. 1204-08;
Decret. Gratiani, Pars III, Dist. iv, c. xliv) to Quiricus and
the Bishops of Iberia concerning the reconciliation of
Nestorians, sets forth the practice of the ancient Church in
this matter. According to this testimony of St. Gregory, in
cases where the heretical baptism was invalid, as with the
Paulinists, Montanists, or Cataphrygians (Conc. Nicaen., can.
xix, P.L., II, 666; Decret. Gratiani, Pars II Causa I, Q. i, c.
xlii), Eunomians (Anomoeans), and others, the rule was that the
penitent should be baptized ( cum ad sanctam Ecclesiam veniunt,
baptizantur); but where the heretical baptism was considered
valid converts were admitted into the Church either by anointing
with chrism, or by the imposition of hands or by a profession of
faith ( aut unctione chrismatis, aut impositione manus, aut
professione fidei ad sinum matris Ecclesiae revocantur).
Applying this rule, St. Gregory declares that Arians were
received into the Church in the West by the imposition of hands,
in the East by unction ( Arianos per impositionem manus
Occidens, per unctionem vero sancti chrismatis . . . Oriens,
reformat), while the Monophysites, who separated from the Church
in the fifth and sixth centuries, were treated with less
severity, being admitted, with some others, upon a mere
profession of the orthodox faith [ sola vera confessione recipit
(Ecclesia)]. St. Gregory's statement applies to the Roman Church
and to Italy (Siricius, Epist., i, c. i; Epist., iv, c. viii;
Innoc. I, Epist. ii, c. viii; Epist. xxii, c. iv), but not to
the whole Western Church, since in Gaul and Spain the rite of
unction was also in use [Second Coun. of Arles, can. xvii; Coun.
of Orange (A.D. 529), can. ii; Coun. of Epaon, can. xxi; Greg.
of Tours, Historia, lib. II, c. xxxi; lib. IV, cc. xxvii,
xxviii; lib. V, c. xxxix; lib. IX, c. xv].
As to the Eastern Church, St. Gregory's phrase entirely agrees
with the rule laid down in the seventh canon of Constantinople,
which, though not emanating from the Ecumenical Council of 381
bears Witness nevertheless to the practice of the Church of
Constantinople in the fifth century [Duchesne, Christian Worship
(London, 1904), 339, 340]. This canon, which was inserted in the
Trullan or Quinisext Synod (canon xcv), and thus found a place
in Byzantine canon law, distinguishes between sects whose
baptism, but not confirmation, was accepted and those whose
baptism and confirmation were rejected. With the Arians,
consequently, are classed the Macedonians, Novatians (Conc.
Nicaen., I, can. ix; Nicaen., II, can. ii), Sabellians,
Apollinarists, and others, who were to be received by the
anointing with chrism on the forehead, eyes, nostrils, mouth,
and ears. Some identify this ceremony of the laying on of hands
with the rite of confirmation, and not merely an imposition of
hands unto penance. A similar discussion prevails in regard to
the anointing with chrism.
I. Imposition of Hands
The imposition of hands, as a sign that due penance had been
done, and in token of reconciliation (Pope Vigilius, P.L., CXXX,
1076), was prescribed first for those who had been baptized in
the Church and who had later fallen into heresy. St. Cyprian in
a letter to Quintus (epist. lxxi, in P.L., IV, 408-411) is
witness of this practice, as is also St. Augustine (De baptismo
contra Donatistas, lib. III, c. xi, in P.L., XLIII, 208). This
rite was prescribed, secondly, for those who had been baptized
in heresy. Regarding Pope Eusebius (A.D. 309 or 310) we read in
the Liber Pontificalis (edit. Duchesne, I, 167): Hic hereticos
invenit in Urbe Roma, quos ad manum impositionis [sic]
reconciliavit. The same work (I, 216) declares of Pope Siricius
(A.D. 384-399): Hic constituit hereticum sub manum impositionis
reconciliari, prsesente cuncta ecclesia. [This latter was
doubtless copied from the first chapter of the decretals of Pope
Siricius, writing to Himerius, Bishop of Tarragona in Spain
(P.L., XIII, 1133, 1134; Duchesne, Liber Pontif;, I, 132, 133).]
Pope St. Stephen declares this rite to be sufficient (see St.
Cyprian, Epist. lxxiv, in P.L., IV, 412, 413; Eusebius, Hist.
Eccl., VII, iii, in P.G., XX, 641). The first Council of Arles
(A.D. 314), can. viii [Labbe, Concilia (Paris, 1671), I, 1428;
P.L., CXXX, 376] inculcates the same law. (See also St. Leo,
Epist. clix, c. vii; Epist. clxvi, c. ii; Epist. clxvii, Inquis.
18; P.L., LIV.)
II. Unction
The unction alone or together with the imposition of hands was
also in vogue. The Council of Laodicea (A.D. 373) in canon vii
(Labbe, Concilia, I, 1497) confirms this usage in the abjuration
of Novatians, Photinians, and Quartodecimans. The second Council
of Arles (A.D. 451) in canon xvii (Labbe, IV, 1013) extends the
discipline to adherents of Bonosius, adversaries of the
virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary ( Bonosianos . . . cum
chrismate, et manus impositione in Ecclesia recipi sufficit).
The Council of Epaon (A.D. 517), canon xvi (Labbe, IV, 1578),
allows the same rite ( Presbyteros, . . . si conversionem
subitam petant, chrismate subvenire permittimus).
III. Profession of Faith
Especially after the birth of Nestorianism and Eutychianism, to
abjuration of heresy was added a solemn profession of faith. It
was thus the bishops who, in the Second Council of Ephesus, had
espoused the cause of Eutyches and Dioscurus were reconciled to
the Church. St. Cyril of Alexandria (Epist. xlviii, ad Donat.
Epis. Nicopol., P.G., LXXII, 252) received a like profession
from Paul of Emesa, who was thought to be affected with
Nestorianism. St. Leo (Epist. i, Ad Episc. Aquilens. c. ii, in
P.L., LIV, 594) required the same from the votaries of
Pelagianism, as did also a council, held at Aachen in 799, from
Felix, Bishop of Urgel [Alzog, Universal Church Hist. (tr.
Cincinnati, 1899), II, 181].
It is to be noted that as clerics, unless degraded or reduced to
the lay state, were not submitted to the humiliation of public
penance, so, consequently, their admission into the Church
involved no imposition of hands or other ceremony except a
profession of faith (Fratres Ballerini, in Epist. S. Leon., n.
1594, P.L., LIV, 1492). In all cases there was demanded the
presentation of a libellus, or form of abjuration, in which the
convert renounced and anathematized his former tenets. After
declaring his abjuration to be free from compulsion, fear, or
other unworthy motive, he proceeded to anathematize all heresies
in general and in particular that sect to which he had belonged,
together with its heresiarchs, past, present, and future. He
then enumerated the tenets accepted by said sect, and, having
repudiated them singly and generally, he ended with a profession
of his belief in the true Faith. Sometimes there was added,
under pain of punishment, a promise to remain in the Church.
Accidental differences only are found in the ancient formulas of
abjuration extant. Later, in the countries especially where the
Inquisition was established, three sorts of abjuration were
practised:
+ Abjuration de formali (of formal heresy), made by a notorious
heretic or apostate;
+ de vehementi (of strong suspicion of heresy), made by a
Catholic strongly suspected of heresy;
+ de levi (of slight suspicion of heresy), made by a Catholic
slightly suspected of heresy.
The abjuration demanded of converts in the present discipline of
the Church is essentially the same as the above. A convert to
the Church who has never been baptized is not obliged to abjure
heresy. A convert, whose baptism is considered valid, or who, at
most, on his reception into the Church is rebaptized
conditionally, is required to make a profession of faith, which
contains an abjuration of heresy. A salutary penance also is
imposed (S. Cong. S. Off., Nov., 1875. See Appendix Conc. Plen.
Balt., II, 277, 278; American edit. Roman Ritual, 1, 2, 3). No
abjuration is required from converts under the age of fourteen
(S. Cong. S. Off., Mar. 8, 1882, in Collectanea S. Cong. de
Propag. Fid., n. 1680, ed. 1903).
ERMONI, in Dictionnaire d arch ologie chr tienne et de liturgie
(Paris, 1903); DESHAYES, in Dict. de th ol. cath. (Paris, 1899),
I, 75; MAUREL, Guide pratique de la liturgie romaine (Paris,
1878), Par. I, 2, 104, art. 6; BENEDICT XIV, de Synodo
Dioecesana, V, ix, n. 10, lib. IX, e. iv, n. 3; Gelasian
Sacramentary, I, 85, 86; BUTLER, in Dict. of Christ. Antiq.
(London, 1893) MARTENE AND DURAND, De Antiquis Ecclesiae
Ritibus, II, lib. CXI, e. vi; FERRARIS, Prompta Bibliotheca, I,
32 sqq.
ANDREW B. MEEHAN
Abner
Abner
A son of Ner, a cousin of Saul, and commander-in-chief of Saul's
army (I Kings xiv, 50: xvii, 55; xxvi, 5, 7, 14). After Saul
with three of his sons had fallen at Mount Gelboe, Abner made
Isboseth, the fourth son of Saul, king over the whole land of
Israel excepting Judea, which adhered to David. For seven years
and a half Abner fought for the throne of Isboseth. After his
defeat near Gabaon, he was hotly pursued by Asael, brother of
Joab, who was David's commander-in-chief, and in self-defense he
reluctantly slew his enemy (II Kings ii, 12 sq.). This
embittered the hostility between the two factions, since Joab
considered himself the avenger ofhis brother Asael. Abner now
married Respha, a concubine f Saul, and thus incurred the
suspicion of aspiring to the throne. Isboseth remonstrated with
the warrior, and the latter became so angry that he made
advances to David. David demanded that Abner should first
restore to him his wife Michol, daughter of Saul, who had been
given to Phaltiel. Abner complied with this condition, and came
to a full understanding with David. After his departure Joab,
David's commander-in-chief, sent for him, and killed him at the
city gate. David bewailed Abner, made Joab walk in mourning-garb
before Abner's bier, and on his death-bed enjoined on Solomon to
avenge Abner's murder.
Palis in Vig., Dict. de la Bible, s.v.
A.J. MAAS
The Abomination of Desolation
The Abomination of Desolation
The importance of this Scriptural expression is chiefly derived
from the fact that in St. Matthew, xxiv, 15, and St. Mark, xiii,
14, the appearance of the "abomination of desolation" standing
in the Holy Place" (Matt.), or where "it ought not" (Mark), is
given by Our Lord to His disciples as the signal for their
flight from Judea, at the time of the approaching ruin of
Jerusalem (Luke, xxi, 20). The expression itself is confessedly
obscure. To determine its meaning, interpreters have naturally
betaken themselves to the original Hebrew of the book of Daniel;
for our first Evangelist distinctly says that "the abomination
of desolation" he has in view "was spoken of by Daniel the
prophet"; and further, the expression he makes use of, in common
with St. Mark, is simply the Greek phrase whereby the Septuagint
translators rendered literally the Hebrew words shiqquc, shomem
found in Daniel, xii, 11; ix, 27; xi, 31. Unfortunately, despite
all their efforts to explain these Hebrew terms, Biblical
scholars are still at variance about their precise meaning.
While most commentators regard the first "shiqquc,", usually
rendered by "abomination", as designating anything (statue,
altar, etc.) that pertains to idolatrous worship, others take it
to be a contemptuous designation of a heathen god or idol.
Again, while most commentators render the second "shomem" by the
abstract word "desolation", others treat it as a concrete form
referring to a person, "a ravager", or even as a participial
known meaning "that maketh desolate". The most recent
interpretation which has been suggested of these Hebrew words is
to the following effect: The phrase shiqquc, shomem stands for
the original expression ba` al shamayim (Baal of heaven), a
title found in Phoenician and Aramaic inscriptions, and the
semitic equivalent of the Greek Zeus, Jupiter, but modified in
Daniel through Jewish aversion for the name of a Pagan deity.
While thus disagreeing as to the precise sense of the Hebrew
phrase usually rendered by "the abomination of desolation",
Christian scholars are practically at one with regard to its
general meaning. They commonly admit, and indeed rightly, that
the Hebrew expression must needs be understood of some
idolatrous emblem, the setting up of which would entail the
ultimate desolation of the Temple of Jerusalem (I Mach. i, 57;
iv, 38). And with this general meaning in view, they proceed to
determine the historical event between Our Lord's prediction and
the ruin of the Temple (A. D. 70), which should be regarded as
"the abomination of desolation" spoken of in St. Matthew, xxiv,
15, and St. Mark, xiii, 14. But here they are again divided.
Many scholars have thought, and still think, that the
introduction of the Roman standards into the Holy Land, and more
particularly into the Holy City, shortly before the destruction
of the Temple, is the event foretold by Our Lord to His
disciples as the signal for their flight from Judea. It is true
that the standards were worshipped by the Roman soldiers and
abhorred by the Jews as the emblem of Roman idolatry. Yet they
can hardly be considered as the "the abomination of desolation"
referred to in St. Matthew, xxiv, 15. The Evangelist says that
this "abomination" is to stand in the "holy place", whereby is
naturally meant the Temple (see also Daniel, ix, 27, where the
Vulgate reads: "there shall be in the Temple the abomination of
the desolation"), and the Roman standards were actually
introduced into the Temple only after it had been entered by
Titus, that, too late to serve as a warning for the Christians
of Judea. Other scholars are of the mind that the desecration of
the Temple by the Zealots who seized it and made it their
stronghold shortly before Jerusalem was invested by Titus, is
the even foretold by Our Lord. But this view is commonly
rejected for the simples reason that "the abomination of
desolation" spoken of by Daniel and referred to in St. Matthew's
Gospel, was certainly something connected with idolatrous
worship. Others, finally, interpret Our Lord's warning to His
disciples in the light of the history of attempt to have his own
statue set up and worshipped in the Temple of Jerusalem. The
following are the principal facts of that history. About A. D.
40, Caius Caligula issued a peremptory decree ordering the
erection and worship of his statute in the Temple of God. He
also appointed to the government of Syria, bidding him carry out
that decree even at the cost of a war against the rebellious
Jews. Whereupon the Jews in tens of thousands protested to the
governor that they were willing to be slaughtered rather than to
be condemned to witness that idolatrous profanation of their
holy Temple. Soon afterwards Petronius asked Caligula to revoke
his order, and Agrippa I, who than lived at Rome, prevailed upon
the Emperor not to enforce his decree. It seems, however, that
Caligula soon repented of the concession, and that but for his
untimely death (A. D. 41) he would have had his statue set up in
Jerusalem (E. Schurer, History of the Jewish People in the Time
of Christ, I Div. II, 95-105; tr.). In view of these facts it is
affirmed by many scholars that the early Christians could easily
regard the forthcoming erection of statue in the Temple as the
act of idolatrous Abomination which, according to the prophet
Daniel, ix, 27, portended the ruin of the House of God, and
therefore see in it the actual sign given by Christ for their
flight from Judea. This last interpretation of the phrase "the
abomination of desolation" is not without its own difficulties.
Yet it seems preferable to the others that have been set for by
commentators at large.
FRANCIS E. GIGOT
Abortion
Abortion
Abortion (from the Latin word aboriri, "to perish") may be
briefly defined as "the loss of a fetal life."
In it the fetus dies while yet within the generative organs of
the mother, or it is ejected or extracted from them before it is
viable; that is, before it is sufficiently developed to continue
its life by itself. The term abortion is also applied, though
less properly, to cases in which the child is become viable, but
does not survive the delivery. In this article we shall take the
word in its widest meaning, and treat of abortion as occurring
at any time between conception and safe delivery. The word
miscarriage is taken in the same wide sense. Yet medical writers
often use these words in special meanings, restricting abortion
to the time when the embryo has not yet assumed specific
features, that is, in the human embryo, before the third month
of gestation; miscarriage occurs later, but before viability;
while the birth of a viable child before the completed term of
nine months is styled premature birth. Viability may exist in
the seventh month of gestation, but it cannot safely be presumed
before the eighth month. If the child survives its premature
birth, there is no abortion -- for this word always denotes the
loss of fetal life.
It was long debated among the learned at what period of
gestation the human embryo begins to be animated by the
rational, spiritual soul, which elevates man above all other
species of the animal creation and survives the body to live
forever. The keenest mind among the ancient philosophers,
Aristotle, had conjectured that the future child was endowed at
conception with a principle of only vegetative life, which was
exchanged after a few days for an animal soul, and was not
succeeded by a rational soul till later; his followers said on
the fortieth day for a male, and the eightieth for a female,
child. The authority of his great name and the want of definite
knowledge to the contrary caused this theory to be generally
accepted up to recent times. Yet, as early as the fourth century
of the Christian era, St. Gregory of Nyssa had advocated the
view which modern science has confirmed almost to a certainty,
namely, that the same life principle quickens the organism from
the first moment of its individual existence until its death
(Eschbach, Disp. Phys., Disp., iii). Now it is at the very time
of conception, or fecundation, that the embryo begins to live a
distinct individual life. For life does not result from an
organism when it has been built up, but the vital principle
builds up the organism of its own body. In virtue of the one
eternal act of the Will of the Creator, Who is of course ever
present at every portion of His creation, the soul of every new
human being begins to exist when the cell which generation has
provided is ready to receive it as its principle of life. In the
normal course of nature the living embryo carries on its work
of, self-evolution within the maternal womb, deriving its
nourishment from the placenta through the vital cord, till, on
reaching maturity, it is by the contraction of the uterus issued
to lead its separate life. Abortion is a fatal termination of
this process. It may result from various causes, which may be
classed under two heads, accidental and intentional.
Accidental causes may be of many different kinds. Sometimes the
embryo, instead of developing in the uterus, remains in one of
the ovaries, or gets lodged in one of the Fallopian tubes, or is
precipitated into the abdomen, resulting, in any of these cases,
in an ectopic, or extra-uterine gestation. This almost
invariably brings on the death of the fetus, and is besides
often fraught with serious danger to the mother. Even if an
ectopic child should live to maturity, it cannot be born by the
natural channel -- but, once it has become viable, it may be
saved by a surgical operation. Most commonly the embryo develops
in the uterus; but there, too, it is exposed to a great variety
of dangers, especially during the first months of its existence.
There may be remote predispositions in the mother to contract
diseases fatal to her offspring. Heredity, malformation,
syphilis, advanced age, excessive weakness, effects of former
sicknesses, etc. may be causes of danger; even the climate may
exercise an unfavorable influence. More immediate causes of
abortion may be found in cruel treatment of the mother by her
husband or in starvation, or any kind of hardship. Her own
indiscretion is often to blame; as when she undertakes excessive
labours or uses intoxicating drinks too freely. Anything in fact
that causes a severe shock to the bodily frame or the nervous
system of the mother may be fatal to the child in her womb. On
the part of the father, syphilis, alcoholism, old age, and
physical weakness may act unfavourably on the offspring at any
time of its existence. The frequency of accidental abortions is
no doubt very great; it must differ considerably according to
the circumstances, so that the proportion between successful and
unsuccessful conceptions is beyond the calculation of the
learned.
Intentional abortions are distinguished by medical writers into
two classes.
+ When they are brought about for social reasons, they are
called criminal abortions; and they are rightly condemned
under any circumstances whatsoever. "Often, very often," said
Dr. Hodge, of the University of Pennsylvania, "must all the
eloquence and all the authority of the practitioner be
employed; often he must, as it were, grasp the conscience of
his weak and erring patient, and let her know, in language not
to be misunderstood, that she is responsible to the Creator
for the life of the being within her" (Wharton and Stille's
Med. Jurispr., Vol. on Abortion, 11).
+ The name of obstetrical abortion is given by physicians to
such as is performed to save the life of the mother. Whether
this practice is ever morally lawful we shall consider below.
It is evident that the determination of what is right or wrong
in human conduct belongs to the science of ethics and the
teaching of religious authority. Both of these declare the
Divine law, "Thou shalt not kill". The embryonic child, as seen
above, has a human soul; and therefore is a man from the time of
its conception; therefore it has an equal right to its life with
its mother; therefore neither the mother, nor medical
practitioner, nor any human being whatever can lawfully take
that life away. The State cannot give such right to the
physician; for it has not itself the right to put an innocent
person to death. No matter how desirable it might seem to be at
times to save the life of the mother, common sense teaches and
all nations accept the maxim, that "evil is never to be done
that good may come of it"; or, which is the same thing, that "a
good end cannot justify a bad means". Now it is an evil means to
destroy the life of an innocent child. The plea cannot be made
that the child is an unjust aggressor. It is simply where nature
and its own parents have put it. Therefore, Natural Law forbids
any attempt at destroying fetal life.
The teachings of the Catholic Church admit of no doubt on the
subject. Such moral questions, when they are submitted, are
decided by the Tribunal of the Holy Office. Now this authority
decreed, 28 May, 1884, and again, 18 August, 1889, that "it
cannot be safely taught in Catholic schools that it is lawful to
perform . . . any surgical operation which is directly
destructive of the life of the fetus or the mother." Abortion
was condemned by name, 24 July, 1895, in answer to the question
whether when the mother is in immediate danger of death and
there is no other means of saving her life, a physician can with
a safe conscience cause abortion not by destroying the child in
the womb (which was explicitly condemned in the former decree),
but by giving it a chance to be born alive, though not being yet
viable, it would soon expire. The answer was that he cannot.
After these and other similar decisions had been given, some
moralists thought they saw reasons to doubt whether an exception
might not be allowed in the case of ectopic gestations.
Therefore the question was submitted: "Is it ever allowed to
extract from the body of the mother ectopic embryos still
immature, before the sixth month after conception is completed?"
The answer given, 20 March, 1902, was: "No; according to the
decree of 4 May, 1898; according to which, as far as possible,
earnest and opportune provision is to be made to safeguard the
life of the child and of the mother. As to the time, let the
questioner remember that no acceleration of birth is licit
unless it be done at a time, and in ways in which, according to
the usual course of things, the life of the mother and the child
be provided for". Ethics, then, and the Church agree in teaching
that no action is lawful which directly destroys fetal life. It
is also clear that extracting the living fetus before it is
viable, is destroying its life as directly as it would be
killing a grown man directly to plunge him into a medium in
which he cannot live, and hold him there till he expires.
However, if medical treatment or surgical operation, necessary
to save a mother's life, is applied to her organism (though the
child's death would, or at least might, follow as a regretted
but unavoidable consequence), it should not be maintained that
the fetal life is thereby directly attacked. Moralists agree
that we are not always prohibited from doing what is lawful in
itself, though evil consequences may follow which we do not
desire. The good effects of our acts are then directly intended,
and the regretted evil consequences are reluctantly permitted to
follow because we cannot avoid them. The evil thus permitted is
said to be indirectly intended. It is not imputed to us provided
four conditions are verified, namely:
+ That we do not wish the evil effects, but make all reasonable
efforts to avoid them;
+ That the immediate effect be good in itself;
+ That the evil is not made a means to obtain the good effect;
for this would be to do evil that Good might come of it -- a
procedure never allowed;
+ That the good effect be as important at least as the evil
effect.
All four conditions may be verified in treating or operating on
a woman with child. The death of the child is not intended, and
every reasonable precaution is taken to save its life; the
immediate effect intended, the mother's life, is good -- no harm
is done to the child in order to save the mother -- the saving
of the mother's life is in itself as good as the saving of the
child's life. Of course provision must be made for the child's
spiritual as well as for its physical life, and if by the
treatment or operation in question the child were to be deprived
of Baptism, which it could receive if the operation were not
performed, then the evil would be greater than the good
consequences of the operation. In this case the operation could
not lawfully be performed. Whenever it is possible to baptize an
embryonic child before it expires, Christian charity requires
that it be done, either before or after delivery; and it may be
done by any one, even though he be not a Christian.
History contains no mention of criminal abortions antecedent to
the period of decadent morality in classic Greece. The crime
seems not to have prevailed in the time of Moses, either among
the Jews or among the surrounding nations; else that great
legislator would certainly have spoken in condemnation of it. No
mention of it occurs in the long enumeration of sins laid to the
charge of the Canaanites. The first reference to it is found in
the books attributed to Hippocrates, who required physicians to
bind themselves by oath not to give to women drinks fatal to the
child in the womb. At that period voluptuousness had corrupted
the morals of the Greeks, and Aspasia was teaching ways of
procuring abortion. In later times the Romans became still more
depraved, and bolder in such practices; for Ovid wrote
concerning the upper classes of his countrymen:
Nunc uterum vitiat quae vult formosa videri,
Raraque, in hoc aevo, est quae velit esse parens.
Three centuries later we meet with the first record of laws
enacted by the State to check this crime. Exile was decreed
against mothers guilty of it; while those who administered the
potion to procure it were if nobles, sent to certain islands, if
plebeians, condemned to work in the metal mines. Still the
Romans in their legislation appear to have aimed at punishing
the wrong done by abortion to the father or the mother, rather
than the wrong done to the unborn child. The early Christians
are the first on record as having pronounced abortion to be the
murder of human beings, for their public apologists,
Athenagoras, Tertullian, and Minutius Felix (Eschbach, "Disp.
Phys.", Disp. iii), to refute the slander that a child was
slain, and its flesh eaten, by the guests at the Agapae,
appealed to their laws as forbidding all manner of murder, even
that of children in the womb. The Fathers of the Church
unanimously maintained the same doctrine. In the fourth century
the Council of Eliberis decreed that Holy Communion should be
refused all the rest of her life, even on her deathbed, to an
adulteress who had procured the abortion of her child. The Sixth
Ecumenical Council determined for the whole Church that anyone
who procured abortion should bear all the punishments inflicted
on murderers. In all these teachings and enactments no
distinction is made between the earlier and the later stages of
gestation. For, though the opinion of Aristotle, or similar
speculations, regarding the time when the rational soul is
infused into the embryo, were practically accepted for many
centuries still it was always held by the Church that he who
destroyed what was to be a man was guilty of destroying a human
life. The great prevalence of criminal abortion ceased wherever
Christianity became established. It was a crime of comparatively
rare occurrence in the Middle Ages. Like its companion crime,
divorce, it did not again become a danger to society till of
late years. Except at times and in places influenced by Catholic
principles, what medical writers call "obstetric" abortion, as
distinct from "criminal" (though both are indefensible on moral
grounds), has always been a common practice. It was usually
performed by means of craniotomy, or the crushing of the child's
head to save the mother's life. Hippocrates, Celsus, Avicenna,
and the Arabian school generally invented a number of
vulnerating instruments to enter and crush the child's cranium.
In more recent times, with the advance of the obsteric science,
more conservative measures have gradually prevailed. By use of
the forceps, by skill acquired in version, by procuring
premature labour, and especially by asepticism in the Caesarean
section and other equivalent operations, medical science has
found much improved means of saving both the child and its
mother. Of late years such progress has been made in this
matter, that craniotomy on the living child has passed out of
reputable practice. But abortion proper, before the fetus is
viable, is still often employed, especially in ectopic
gestation; and there are many men and women who may be called
professional abortionists.
In former times civil laws against all kinds of abortion were
very severe among Christian nations. Among the Visigoths, the
penalty was death, or privation of sight, for the mother who
allowed it and for the father who consented to it, and death for
the abortionist. In Spain, the woman guilty of it was buried
alive. An edict of the French King Henry II in 1555, renewed by
Louis XIV in 1708, inflicted capital punishment for adultery and
abortion combined. Later French law (i.e., early twentieth
century) punished the abortionist with imprisonment, and
physicians, surgeons, and pharmacists, who prescribe or furnish
the means, with the penalty of forced labour. For England,
Blackstone stated the law as follows:
Life is the immediate gift of God, a right inherent by nature in
every individual; and it begins, in contemplation of law, as soon as
an infant is able to stir in its mother's womb. For if a woman is
quick with child, and by a potion, or otherwise, killeth it in her
womb, or if any one beat her, whereby the child dieth, and she is
delivered of a dead child; this, though not murder, was by the
ancient law homicide or manslaughter. But the modern law does not
look upon this offence in so atrocious a light, but merely as a
heinous misdemeanour.
In the United States, legislation in this matter is neither
strict nor uniform, nor are convictions of frequent occurrence.
In some of the States any medical practitioner is allowed to
procure abortion whenever he judges it necessary to save the
mother's life.
The Catholic Church has not relaxed her strict prohibition of
all abortion; but, as we have seen above, she has made it more
definite. As to the penalties she inflicts upon the guilty
parties, her present legislation was fixed by the Bull of Pius
IX "Apostolicae Sedis". It decrees excommunication -- that is,
deprivation of the Sacraments and of the Prayers of the Church
in the case of any of her members, and other privations besides
in the case of clergymen -- against all who seek to procure
abortion, if their action produces the effect. Penalties must
always be strictly interpreted. Therefore, while anyone who
voluntarily aids in procuring abortion, in any way whatever,
does morally wrong, only those incur the excommunication who
themselves actually and efficaciously procure the abortion. And
the abortion here meant is that which is strictly so called,
namely, that performed before the child is viable. For no one
but the lawgiver has the right to extend the law beyond the
terms in which it is expressed. On the other hand, no one can
restrict its meaning by private authority, so as to make it less
than the received terms of Church language really signify. Now
Gregory XIV had enacted the penalty of excommunication for
abortion of a "quickened" child but the present law makes no
such distinction, and therefore it must be differently
understood.
That distinction, however, applies to another effect which may
result from the procuring of abortion; namely, he who does so
for a child after quickening incurs an irregularity, or
hindrance to his receiving or exercising Orders in the Church.
But he would not incur such irregularity if the embryo were not
yet quickened. The terms "quickened" and "animation" in present
usage are applied to the child after the mother can percieve its
motion, which usually happens about the one hundred and
sixteenth day after conception. But in the old canon law, which
established the irregularity here referred to the "animation" of
the embryo was supposed to occur on the fortieth day for a male
child, and on the eightieth day for a female child. In such
matters of canon law, just as in civil law, many technicalities
and intricacies occur, which it often takes the professional
student to understand fully. In regard to the decisions of the
Roman tribunal quoted above it is proper to remark that while
they claim the respect and loyal adhesion of Catholics, they are
not irreformable, since they are not definitive judgments, nor
do they proceed directly from the Supreme Pontiff, who alone has
the prerogative of infallibility. If ever reasons should arise,
which is most improbable, to change these pronouncements those
reasons would receive due consideration.
C. COPPENS
Physical Effects of Abortion
The Physical Effects of Abortion
Definition. The expulsion of the human ovum occurring during the
first three months of pregnancy, and occurring from any cause
whatsoever, is called abortion. In the fourth, fifth, sixth, and
seventh months -- i.e., from the formation of the placenta to
the period of viability -- the occurrence is called immature
delivery, or miscarriage, and a delivery occurring from the
twenty-eighth week (the earliest period of viability) to the
thirty-eighth week is called premature.
Causes of abortion. To understand the physical effects of
abortion we must know something of the causes, which are in the
main the same as the causes of miscarriage and premature
delivery. Abortion may be due to pathological changes in the
ovum, the uterus, or its adnexa one or both -- to the physical
or nervous condition of the woman, to diseases either inherited
or acquired (syphilis, tuberculosis, rheumatism); to any
infectious, contagious, or inflammatory disease; to shock,
injury, or accident. It may be induced knowingly, willingly, and
criminally by the pregnant person herself, or by someone else,
with the aid of drugs, or instruments, or both.
Physical effects of abortion. Naturally, therefore, the physical
effects of abortion will depend in direct ratio on the causation
thereof, and the comparative malignity or benignity of such
causation. In any case, abortion is fraught with serious
consequences, direct and indirect -- and is a sad miscarriage of
nature's plan, greatly to be deplored, and earnestly,
strenuously, and conscientiously to be avoided. Of course, when
brought about with criminal intent, abortion is nothing less
than murder in the first degree; and if the law of the land does
not discover and punish the criminal, the higher law of the God
of Nature and of Nature's inexorable reprisals for interference
with, or destruction of her beneficent designs, will sooner or
later most certainly do so.
When abortion is due to pathological causes it is usually
preceded by the death of the fetus; so that the causes of
abortion are really the causes producing the death of the fetus.
The abortion may be complete or partial. If complete, the danger
is principally from shock and haemorrhage; if incomplete and any
debris remains, there is danger of septicaemia, uraemia,
endometritis, perimetritis, diseases of the tubes, ovaries,
bladder, cervix uteri, vaginal canal, and rectum; together with
catarrhal discharges from one or more of these parts,
displacements, impoverished blood supply, various neuroses, and
usually a long and expensive convalescence.
The retention of the dead fetus is not always so dangerous. Even
if decomposition or putrefaction occur, Nature frequently --
possibly more often than we are willing to give her credit for
-- eliminates the offending foreign mass without the aid of the
obstetrician. But it is not wise to advocate the waiting for
such happy and spontaneous events. However while it is true that
with proper medical care and attention most cases of abortion
(excluding criminal cases and those complicated with other
morbid conditions) present a modicum of danger, yet we must not
forget that reports and statistics on this subject are very
unreliable. First, there may be a false diagnosis; and secondly,
concealment on the part of the patient, attendants, and all
concerned is exceedingly common today.
Obstetrical science has made many and important advances; but
abortions from one cause or another (especially criminal
abortion) continue in abundance; and their results have been and
are still crowding the medical offices. To tear out the living
products of conception by the roots is, in most cases, to give
the pregnant woman gratuitous transportation for eternity. Even
in spontaneous cases, as we have seen, death may occur from
various causes. How much greater the danger, then, when the
vandal hand of the professional abortionist adds wounds and
injuries to complete his diabolical work.
Conclusion. Since so many people today have ceased to look on
abortion as a calamity at all times, and as a moral monstrosity
in its criminal aspect, they should be deterred from committing
it by the fear of physical consequences, if they are not moved
by the love of morality and righteousness.
J.N. BUTLER
Charles Francois d'Abra de Raconis
Charles Franc,ois d'Abra de Raconis
A French bishop, born at the Chateau de Raconis in 1580 of a
Calvinistic family; died 1646.
In 1592, this family was converted to the Catholic faith, of
which Charles then twelve sears of age, was to become an earnest
defender. He taught philosophy at the College of Plessis, in
1609; theology at the College of Navarre, in 1615, and three
years later was appointed court preacher and royal almoner. At
this epoch he took an active part in religious polemics and
wrote works of controversy. In 1637, he was appointed Bishop of
Lavaur, but was not consecrated until 1639. In 1643 he was back
in Paris, and controversies with the Jansenists engaged him up
to his death. St. Vincent de Paul spurred him on and encouraged
him. Two years before his death he published his "Examen et
jugement du livre de la frequente communion fait contre la
frequente communion et publie sous le nom du sieur Arnauld"
(Paris, 1644). The following year he published a rejoinder to
the reply to this. Arnauld affected great contempt for him, and
declared that his works were "despised by all respectable
persons". Raconis also wrote against the heresy of "two heads of
the Church [Sts. Peter and Paul]," formulated by Martin de
Barcos. The bishop's "Primaute et Souverainete singuliere de
saint Pierre" (1645) roused the wrath of his opponents. Towards
the close of 1645, the report was circulated in Paris that he
had written to the Pope, denouncing the dangerous teachings in
the "Frequente Communion", and telling the Pope that some French
bishops tolerated and approved of these impieties The Bishop of
Grasse informed a general assembly of the clergy of this fact.
This aroused their animosity, all the more since some of them
had recommended Arnauld's work. They entered a complaint with
the Nuncio, and then compelled Raconis to say whether he had
written the Setter or not. Although he denied having done so,
they drew up a common protestation against the accusations of
which they were the objects and sent it to Innocent X.
JOHN J. A' BECKET
Don Isaac Abrabanel
Don Isaac Abrabanel
(Also: Abravanel, Abarbanel).
Jewish statesman, apologist and exegete, born in Lisbon 1437;
died in Venice, 1508, buried in Padua. From his early youth, he
was carefully instructed in the Talmudlc and Rabbinic
literatures, and mastered the various branches of secular
learning. His keen intellect and, above all, a great business
ability drew to him the attention of Alfonso V of Portugal, who
made him his treasurer, a position that he held until 1481. The
favour shown by a Catholic prince to a Jew shocked the public
opinion of those times, and under John II Abrabanel was accused
of conspiring with the Duke of Braganza, and barely saved his
life by fleeing to Castile, 1483. Soon afterwards he entered the
service of Ferdinand and Isabella, 1484-92. After the fall of
Granada, he shared the fate of his race, and was banished from
Spain in 1492. He repaired to Naples and, owing to various
vicissitudes went successively to Messina, Corfu, Monopoli, and
finally to Venice. Most of Abrabanel's works date from the last
years of his life, when, on account of his misfortunes, he found
more leisure for collecting and ordering his thoughts. Abrabanel
knew Plato and Aristotle, and is often ranked among the Jewish
philosophers. His philosophy, however, was intended by him
simply as a means of defending his religious convictions. He can
hardly be said to have written any work professedly
philosophical, with the possible exception of a juvenile
treatise on the form of the natural elements; his views in this
respect must be gathered from his various theological and
exegetical treatises. As a theologian and apologist Abrabanel
shows himself a champion of the most rigid Jewish orthodoxy, and
does not hesitate to oppose even Maimonides when the latter
seems to depart from the traditional belief. In the field of
Biblical exegesis, Abrabanel has the merit of having anticipated
much of what has been advanced as new by modern investigators,
and of having considered systematically not only the letter of
the sacred text, but also the persons of its authors, their aim
and surroundings. Each commentary is furnished with a preface in
which these preliminary questions are treated. His familiarity
with Christian authors his acquaintance with court life and
customs, a keen sense of his misfortunes, joined with a very
extensive knowledge and a great power of observation, fitted him
eminently for the task of a Biblical interpreter. We have from
him a commentary on Deuteronomy; on the first four books of the
Pentateuch; on the earlier and on the later Prophets. They have
been warmly lauded both by Jews and by Christians, have passed
through several editions, and many of them have been, in whole
or in part, translated into Latin. Of his other works we may
mention "The Crown of the Ancients", "The Pinnacle of Faith",
"The Sources of Salvation", in the form of a commentary on
Daniel, "The Salvation of His Anointed" "The Herald of
Salvation", in which are collected and explained all the
Messianic texts. His works the titles of which are here rendered
in English were written in a clear, refined, but occasionally
diffuse modern Hebrew.
ROMAIN BUTIN
Abraham
Abraham
The original form of the name, Abram, is apparently the Assyrian
Abu-ramu. It is doubtful if the usual meaning attached to that
word "lofty father", is correct. The meaning given to Abraham in
Genesis 17:5 is popular word play, and the real meaning is
unknown. The Assyriologist, Hommel suggests that in the Minnean
dialect, the Hebrew letter He ("h") is written for long a.
Perhaps here we may have the real derivation of the word, and
Abraham may be only a dialectical form of Abram.
The story of Abraham is contained in the Book of Genesis, 11:26
to 25:18. We shall first give a brief outline of the Patriarch's
life, as told in that portion of Genesis, then we shall in
succession discuss the subject of Abraham from the viewpoints of
the Old Testament, New Testament, profane history, and legend.
A BRIEF OUTLINE OF ABRAHAM'S LIFE
Thare had three sons, Abram, Nachor, and Aran. Abram married
Sarai. Thare took Abram and his wife, Sarai, and Lot, the son of
Aran, who was dead, and leaving Ur of the Chaldees, came to
Haran and dwelt there till he died. Then, at the call of God,
Abram, with his wife, Sarai, and Lot, and the rest of his
belongings, went into the Land of Chanaan, amongst other places
to Sichem and Bethel, where he built altars to the Lord: A
famine breaking out in Chanaan, Abram journeyed southward to
Egypt, and when he had entered the land, fearing that he would
be killed on account of his wife, Sarai, he bade her say she was
his sister. The report of Sarai's beauty was brought to the
Pharao, and he took her into his harem, and honoured Abram on
account of her. Later, however finding out that she was Abram's
wife, he sent her away unharmed, and, upbraiding Abram for what
he had done, he dismissed him from Egypt. From Egypt Abram came
with Lot towards Bethel, and there, finding that their herds and
flocks had grown to be very large, he proposed that they should
separate and go their own ways. So Lot chose the country about
the Jordan, whilst Abram dwelt in Chanaan, and came and dwelt in
the vale of Mambre in Hebron. Now, on account of a revolt of the
Kings of Sodom and Gomorrha and other kings from Chodorlahomor
King of Elam, after they had served him twelve years, he in the
fourteenth year made war upon them with his allies, Thadal king
of nations, Amraphel Kin& of Senaar, and Arioch King of Pontus.
The King of Elam was victorious, and had already reached Dan
with Lot a prisoner and laden with spoil, when he was overtaken
by Abram. With 318 men the patri arch surprises, attacks, and
defeats him, he retakes Lot and the spoil, and returns in
triumph. On his way home, he is met by Melchisedech, king of
Salem who brings forth bread and wine, and blesses him And Abram
gives him tithes of all he has; but for] himself he reserves
nothing. God promises Abram that his seed shall be as the stars
of heaven, and he shall possess the land of Chanaan. But Abram
does not see how this is to be, for he has already grown old.
Then the promise is guaranteed by a sacrifice between God and
Abram, and by a vision and a supernatural intervention in the
night. Sarai, who was far advanced in years and had given up the
idea of bearing children, persuaded Abram to take to himself her
hand-maid, Agar. He does so, and Agar being with child despises
the barren Sarai. For this Sarai afflicts her so that she flies
into the desert, but is persuaded to return by an angel who
comforts her with promises of the greatness of the son she is
about to bear. She returns and brings forth Ismael. Thirteen
years later God appears to Abram and promises him a son by
Sarai, and that his posterity will be a great nation. As a sign,
he changes Abram's name to Abraham, Sarai's to Sara, and ordains
the rite of circumcision. One day later, as Abraham is sitting
by his tent, in the vale of Mambre, Jehovah with two angels
appears to him in human form. He shows them hospitality. Then
again the promise of a son named Isaac is renewed to Abraham.
The aged Sarah hears incredulously and laughs. Abraham is then
told of the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha for
their sins but obtains from Jehovah the promise that he will not
destroy them if he finds ten just men therein. Then follows a
description of the destruction of the two cities and the escape
of Lot. Next morning Abraham, looking from his tent towards
Sodom, sees the smoke of destruction ascending to heaven. After
this, Abraham moves south to Gerara, and again fearing for his
life says of his wife, "she is my sister". The king of Gerara,
Abimelech, sends and takes her, but learning in a dream that she
is Abraham's wife he restores her to him untouched, and rebukes
him and gives him gifts. In her old age Sarah bears a son,
lsaac, to Abraham, and he is circumcised on the eighth day.
Whilst he is still young, Sarah is jealous, seeing Ismael
playing with the child Isaac, so she procures that Agar and her
son shall be cast out. Then Agar would have allowed Ismael to
perish in the wilderness, had not an angel encouraged her by
telling her of the boy's future. Abraham is next related to have
had a dispute with Abimelech over a well at Bersabee, which ends
in a covenant being made between them. It was after this that
the great trial of the faith of Abraham takes place. God
commands him to sacrifice his only son Isaac. When Abraham has
his arm raised and is in the very act of striking, an angel from
heaven stays his hand and makes the most wonderful promises to
him of the greatness of his posterity because of his complete
trust in God. Sarah dies at the age of 127, and Abraham, having
purchased from Ephron the Hethite the cave in Machpelah near
Mambre, buries her there. His own career is not yet quite ended
for first of all he takes a wife for his son Isaac, Rebecca from
the city of Nachor in Mesopotamia. Then he marries Cetura, old
though he is, and has by her six children. Finally, leaving all
his possessions to Isaac, he dies at age 170, and is buried by
Isaac and Ismael in the cave of Machpelah.
VIEWPOINT OF OLD TESTAMENT
Abraham may be looked upon as the starting-point or source of
Old Testament religion. So that from the days of Abraham men
were wont to speak of God as the God of Abraham, whilst we do
not find Abraham referring in the same way to anyone before him.
So we have Abraham's servant speaking of "the God of my father
Abraham" (Gen. xxiv, 12). Jehovah, in an apparition to Isaac,
speaks of himself as the God of Abraham (Gen. xxvi, 24), and to
Jacob he is "the God of my father Abraham" (Gen. xxxi, 42). So,
too, showing that the religion of Israel does not begin with
Moses, God says to Moses: "I am the God of thy fathers, the God
of Abraham" etc. (Ex. iii, 6). The same expression is used in
the Psalms (xlvi, 10) and is common in the Old Testament.
Abraham is thus selected as the first beginning or source of the
religion of the children of Israel and the origin of its close
connection with Jehovah, because of his faith, trust, and
obedience to and in Jehovah and because of Jehovah's promises to
him and to his seed. So, in Genesis, xv, 6, it is said: "Abram
believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice." This
trust in God was shown by him when he left Haran and journeyed
with his family into the unknown country of Chanaan. It was
shown principally when he was willing to sacrifice his only son
Isaac, in obedience to a command from God. It was on that
occasion that God said: "Because thou hast not spared thy only
begotten son for my sake I will bless thee" etc. (Gen., xxii,
16, 17). It is to this and other promises made so often by God
to Israel that the writers of the Old Testament refer over and
over again in confirmation of their privileges as the chosen
people. These promises, which are recorded to have been made no
less than eight times, are that God will give the land of
Chanaan to Abraham and his seed (Gen., xii, 7) that his seed
shall increase and multiply as the stars of heaven; that he
himself shall be blessed and that in him "all the kindred of the
earth shall be blessed" (xii, 3). Accordingly the traditional
view of the life of Abraham, as recorded in Genesis, is that it
is history in the strict sense of the word. Thus Father von
Hummelauer, S.J., in his commentary on Genesis in the "Cursus
Scripturae Sacrae" (30), in answer to the question from what
author the section on Abraham first proceeded, replies, from
Abraham as the first source. Indeed he even says that it is all
in one style, as a proof of its origin, and that the Passage,
xxv, 5-ll, concerning the goods, death, and burial of Abraham
comes from Isaac. It must, however, be added that it is doubtful
if Father von Hummelauer still adheres to these views, written
before 1895, since he has much modified his position in the
volume on Deuteronomy.
Quite a different view on the section of Genesis treating of
Abraham, and indeed of the whole of Genesis, is taken by modern
critical scholars. They almost unanimously hold that the
narrative of the patriarch's life is composed practically in its
entirety of three writings or writers called respectively the
Jahvist, the Elohist, and the priestly writer, and denoted by
the letters J, E, and P. J and E consisted of collections of
stories relating to the patriarch, some of older, some of later,
origin. Perhaps the stories of J show a greater antiquity than
those of E. Still the two authors are very much alike, and it is
not always easy to distinguish one from the other in the
combined narrative of J and E. From what we can observe, neither
the Jahvist nor the Elohist was a personal author. Both are
rather schools, and represent the collections of many years.
Both collections were closed before the time of the prophets; J
some time in the ninth century B.C., and E early in the eighth
century, the former probably in the South Kingdom, the latter in
the North. Then towards the end of the kingdom, perhaps owing to
the inconvenience of having two rival accounts of the stories of
the patriarchs etc. going about, a redactor R.JE (?) combined
the two collections in one, keeping as much as possible to the
words of his sources, making as few changes as possible so as to
fit them into one another, and perhaps mostly following J in the
account of Abraham. Then in the fifth century a writer who
evidently belonged to the sacerdotal caste wrote down again an
account of primitive and patriarchal history from the priestly
point of view. He attached great importance to clearness and
exactness; his accounts of things are often cast into the shape
of formulas (cf. Genesis, i); he is very particular about
genealogies, also as to chronological notes. The vividness and
colour of the older patriarchal narratives, J and E, are wanting
in the later one, which in the main is as formal as a legal
document, though at times it is not wanting in dignity and even
grandeur, as is the case in the first chapter of Genesis.
Finally, the moral to be drawn from the various events narrated
is more clearly set forth in this third writing and, according
to the critics the moral standpoint is that of the fifth century
B.C. Lastly, after the time of Ezra, this last history, P was
worked up into one with the already combined narrative J.E. by a
second redactor R. JEP, the result being the present history of
Abraham, and indeed the present book of Genesis; though in all
probability insertions were made at even a later date.
VIEWPOINT OF NEW TESTAMENT
The generation of Jesus Christ is traced back to Abraham by St.
Matthew, and though in Our Lord's genealogy, according to St.
Luke, he is shown to be descended according to the flesh not
only from Abraham but also from Adam, still St. Luke shows his
appreciation of the fruits of descent from Abraham by
attributing all the blessings of God on Israel to the promises
made to Abraham. This he does in the Magnificat, iii, 55, and in
the Benedictus, iii, 73. Moreover, as the New Testament traces
the descent of Jesus Christ from Abraham, so it does of all the
Jews; though as a rule, when this is done, it is accompanied
with a note of warning, lest the Jews should imagine that they
are entitled to place confidence in the fact of their carnal
descent from Abraham, without anything further. Thus (Luke, iii,
8) John the Baptist says: "Do not begin to say: We have Abraham
for our father, for I say to you God is able of these stones to
raise up children to Abraham." In Luke, xix, 9 our Saviour calls
the sinner Zacheus a son of Abraham, as he likewise calls a
woman whom he had healed a daughter of Abraham (Luke, xiii, 16);
but in these and many similar cases, is it not merely another
way of calling them Jews or Israelites, just as at times he
refers to the Psalms under the general name of David, without
implying that David wrote all the Psalms, and as he calls the
Pentateuch the Books of Moses, without pretending to settle the
question of the authorship of that work? It is not carnal
descent from Abraham to which importance is attached; rather, it
is to practising the virtues attributed to Abraham in Genesis.
Thus in John, viii, the Jews, to whom Our Lord was speaking,
boast (33): "We are the seed of Abraham", and Jesus replies
(39): "If ye be the children of Abraham, do the works of
Abraham". St. Paul, too, shows that he is a son of Abraham and
glories in that fact as in II Cor., xi, 22, when he exclaims:
"They are the seed of Abraham, so am I". And again (Rom., xi,
l): "I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham", and he
addresses the Jews of Antioch in Pisidia (Acts, xiii, 26) as
"sons of the race of Abraham". But, following the teaching of
Jesus Christ St. Paul does not attach too much importance to
carnal descent from Abraham; for he says (Gal., iii 29): "If you
be Christ's, then you are the seed of Abraham", and again (Rom.,
lx, 6): "All are not Israelites who are of Israel; neither are
all they who are the seed of Abraham, children". So, too, we can
observe in all the New Testament the importance attached to the
promises made to Abraham. In the Acts of the Apostles, iii, 25,
St. Peter reminds the Jews of the promise, "in thy seed shall
all the families of the earth be blessed". So does St. Stephen
in his speech before the Council (Acts, vii), and St. Paul in
the Epistle to the Hebrews, vi, 13. Nor was the faith of the
ancient patriarch less highly thought of by the New Testament
writers. The passage of Genesis which was most prominently
before them was xv, 6: "Abraham believed God, and it was reputed
to him unto justice." In Romans, iv, St. Paul argues strongly
for the supremacy of faith, which he says justified Abraham; '
for if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to
glory, but not before God." The same idea is inculcated in the
Epistle to the Galatians, iii, where the question is discussed:
"Did you receive the spirit by the works of the law, or by the
hearing of faith?" St. Paul decides that it is by faith, and
says: "Therefore they that are of faith shall be justified with
faithful Abraham". It is clear that this language, taken by
itself, and apart from the absolute necessity of good works
upheld by St. Paul, is liable to mislead and actually has misled
many in the history of the Church. Hence, in order to appreciate
to the full the Catholic doctrine of faith, we must supplement
St. Paul by St. James. In ii, 17-22, of the Catholic Epistle we
read: "So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself.
But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works, show
me thy faith without works, and I will show thee by works my
faith. Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well; the
devils also believe and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man,
that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father
justified by works, and by works faith was made perfect?"
In the seventh chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, St. Paul
enters into a long discussion concerning the eternal priesthood
of Jesus Christ. He recalls the words of the 109th psalm more
than once, in which it is said: "Thou art a Driest for ever
according to the order of Melchisedech." He recalls the fact
that Melchisedech is etymologically the king of justice and also
king of peace; and moreover that he is not only king, but also
priest of the Most High God. Then, calling to mind that there is
no account of his father, mother, or genealogy, nor any record
of his heirs, he likens him to Christ king and priest; no Levite
nor according to the order of Aaron, but a priest forever
according to the order of Melchisedech.
IN THE LIGHT OF PROFANE HISTORY
One is inclined to ask, when considering the light which profane
history may shed on the life of Abraham: Is not the life of the
patriarch incredible? That question may be, and is, answered in
different ways, according to the point of view of the
questioner. Perhaps it will not be without interest to quote the
answer of Professor Driver, an able and representative exponent
of moderate critical views:
Do the patriarchal narratives contain intrinsic historical
improbabilities? Or, in other words, is there anything intrinsically
improbable in the lives of the several patriarchs, and the
vicissitudes through which they severally pass? In considering this
question a distinction must be drawn between the different sources
of which these narratives are composed. Though particular details in
them may be improbable, and though the representation may in parts
be coloured by the religious and other associations of the age in
which they were written, it cannot be said that the biographies of
the first three patriarchs, as told in J and E, are, generally
speaking, historically improbable; the movements and general lives
of Abraham Isaac, and Jacob are, taken on the whole, credible (
Genesis, p. xlvi).
Such is the moderate view; the advanced attitude is somewhat
different." The view taken by the patient reconstructive
criticism of our day is that, not only religiously, but even, in
a qualified sense, historically also, the narratives of Abraham
have a claim on our attention" (Cheyne, Encyc. Bib., 26). Coming
now to look at the light thrown by profane history upon the
stories of Abraham's life as given in Genesis, we have, first of
all, the narratives of ancient historians, as Nicholas of
Damascus, Berosus, Hecateus, and the like. Nicholas of Damascus
tells how Abraham, when he left Chaldea lived for some years in
Damascus. In fact in Josephus he is said to have been the fourth
king of that city. But then there is no practical doubt that
this story is based on the words of Genesis, xiv, 15, in which
the town of Damascus is mentioned. As to the great man whom
Josephus mentions as spoken of by Berosus, there is nothing to
show that that great man was Abraham. In the "Praeparatio
Evang." of Eusebius there are extracts recorded from numerous
ancient writers, but no historical value can be attached to
them. In fact, as far as ancient historians are concerned, we
may say that all we know about Abraham is contained in the book
of Genesis.
A much more important and interesting question is the amount of
value to be attached to the recent archaeological discoveries of
Biblical and other explorers in the East. Archaeologists like
Hommel, and more especially Sayce, are disposed to attach very
great significance to them. They say, in fact, that these
discoveries throw a serious element of doubt over many of the
conclusions of the higher critics. On the other hand, critics,
both advanced as Cheyne and moderate as Driver, do not hold the
deductions drawn by these archaeologists from the evidence of
the monuments in very high esteem, but regard them as
exaggerations. To put the matter more precisely, we quote the
following from Professor Sayce, to enable the reader to see for
himself what he thinks (Early Hist. of the Hebrews, 8):"
Cuneiform tablets have been found relating to Chodorlahomor and
the other kings of the East mentioned in the 14th chapter of
Genesis, while in the Tel-el-Amarna correspondence the king of
Jerusalem declares that he had been raised to the throne by the
'arm' of his God, and was therefore, like Melchisedech, a
Driest-king. But Chodorlahomor and Melchisedech had long ago
been banished to mythland and criticism could not admit that
archaeological discovery had restored them to actual history.
Writers, accordingly, in complacent ignorance of the cuneiform
texts, told the Assyriologists that their translations and
interpretations were alike erroneous." That passage will make it
clear how much the critics and archaeologists are at variance.
But no one can deny that Assyriology has thrown some light on
the stories of Abraham and the other patriarchs. Thus the name
of Abraham was known in those ancient times; for amongst other
Canaanitish or Amorite names found in deeds of sale of that
period are those of Abi-ramu, or Abram, Jacob-el (Ya'qub-il),
and Josephel (Yasub-il). So, too, of the fourteenth chapter of
Genesis, which relates the war of Chodorlahomor and his allies
in Palestine, it is not so long ago that the advanced critics
relegated it to the region of fable, under the conviction that
Babylonians and Elamites at that early date in Palestine and the
surrounding country was a gross anachronism. But now Professor
Pinches has deciphered certain inscriptions relating to
Babylonia in which the five kings, Amraphel King of Senaar,
Arioch King of Pontus, Chodorlahomor King of the Elamites, and
Thadal King of nations, are identified with Hammurabi King. of
Babylon, Eri-aku, Kudur-laghghamar, and Tuduchula, son of Gazza,
and which tells of a campaign of these monarchs in Palestine. So
that no one can any longer assert that the war spoken of in
Genesis, xiv, can only be a late reflection of the wars of
Sennacherib and others in the times of the kings. From the
Tel-el-Amarna tab]ets we know that Babylonian influence was
predominant in Palestine in those days. Moreover, we have light
thrown by the cuneiform inscriptions upon the incident of
Melchisedech. In Genesis, xiv, 18, it is said: "Melchisedech,
the King of Salem, bringing forth bread and wine, for he was the
priest of the Most High God, blessed him." Amongst the
Tel-el-Amarna letters is one from Ebed-Tob, King of Jerusalem
(the city is Ursalim, i. e. city of Salim, and it is spoken of
as Salem). He is priest appointed by Salem, the god of Peace,
and is hence both king and priest. In the same manner
Melchisedech is priest and king, and naturally comes to greet
Abraham returning in peace; and hence, too, Abraham offers to
him as to a priest a tithe of the spoils. On the other hand, it
must be stated that Professor Driver will not admit Sayce's
deductions from the inscriptions as to EbedTob, and will not
recognize any analogy between Salem and the Most High God.
Taking archaeology as a whole, it cannot be doubted that no
definite results have been attained as to Abraham. What has come
to light is susceptible of different interpretations. But there
is no doubt that archaeology is putting an end to the idea that
the patriarchal legends are mere myth. They are shown to be more
than that. A state of things is being disclosed in patriarchal
times quite consistent with much that is related in Genesis, and
at times even apparently confirming the facts of the Bible.
VIEWPOINT OF LEGEND
We come now to the question: how far legend plays a part in the
life of Abraham as recorded in Genesis. It is a practical and
important question, because it is so much discussed by modern
critics and they all believe in it. In setting forth the
critical view on the subject, I must not be taken as giving my
own views also.
Hermann Gunkel, in the Introduction to his Commentary on Genesis
(3) writes: "There is no denying that there are legends in the
Old Testament, consider for instance the stories of Samson and
Jonah. Accordingly it is not a matter of belief or scepticism,
but merely a matter of obtaining better knowledge, to examine
whether the narratives of Genesis are history or legend." And
again: "In a people with such a highly developed poetical
faculty as Israel there must have been a place for saga too. The
senseless confusion of ' legend ' with ' Iying ' has caused good
people to hesitate to concede that there are legends in the Old
Testament. But legends are not lies; on the contrary, they are a
particular form of poetry." These passages give a very good idea
of the present position of the Higher Criticism relative to the
legends of Genesis, and of Abraham in particular.
The first principle enunciated by the critics is that the
accounts of the primitive ages and of the patriarchal times
originated amongst people who did not practise the art of
writing. Amongst all peoples, they say, poetry and saga were the
first beginning of history; so it was in Greece and Rome, so it
was in Israel. These legends were circulated, and handed down by
oral tradition, and contained, no doubt, a kernel of truth. Very
often, where individual names are used these names in reality
refer not to individuals but to tribes, as in Genesis, x, and
the names of the twelve Patriarchs, whose migrations are those
of the tribes they represent. It is not of course to be supposed
that these legends are no older than the collections J, E, and
P, in which they occur. They were in circulation ages before,
and for long periods of time, those of earlier origin being
shorter, those of later origin longer, often rather romances
than legends, as that of Joseph. Nor were they all of
Israelitish origin; some were Babylonian, some Egyptian. As to
how the legends arose, this came about, they say, in many ways.
At times the cause was etymological, to explain the meaning of a
name, as when it is said that Isaac received his name because
his mother laughed (cahaq); sometimes they were ethnological, to
explain the geographical position, the adversity, or prosperity,
of a certain tribe; sometimes historical, sometimes ceremonial,
as the account explaining the covenant of circumcision;
sometimes geological, as the explanation of the appearance of
the Dead Sea and its surroundings. AEtiological legends of this
kind form one class of those to be found in the lives of the
patriarchs and elsewhere in Genesis. But there are others
besides which do not concern us here.
When we try to discover the age of the formation of the
patriarchal legends, we are confronted with a question of great
complexity. For it is not merely a matter of the formation of
the simple legends separately, but also of the amalgamation of
these into more complex legends. Criticism teaches us that that
period would have ended about the year 1200 B.C. Then would have
followed the period of remodeling the legends, so that by 900
B.C. they would have assumed substantially the form they now
have. After that date, whilst the legends kept in substance to
the form they had received, they were modified in many ways so
as to bring them into conformity with the moral standard of the
day, still not so completely that the older and less
conventional ideas of a more primitive age did not from time to
time show through them. At this time, too, many collections of
the ancient legends appear to have been made, much in the same
way as St. Luke tells us in the beginning of his Gospel that
many had written accounts of Our Saviour's life on their own
authority.
Amongst other collections were those of J in the South and E in
the North. Whilst others perished these two survived, and were
supplemented towards the end of the captivity by the collection
of P, which originated amidst priestly surroundings and was
written from the ceremonial standpoint. Those that hold these
views maintain that it is the fusion of these three collections
of legends which has led to confusion in some incidents in the
life of Abraham as for instance in the case of Sarai in Egypt,
where her age seems inconsistent with her adventure with the
Pharao. Hermann Gunkel writes (148): "It is not strange that the
chronology of P displays everywhere the most absurd oddities
when injected into the old legends, as a result, Sarah is still
at sixty-five a beautiful woman whom the Egyptians seek to
capture, and Ishmael is carried on his mother's shoulders after
he is a youth of sixteen."
The collection of P was intended to take the place of the old
combined collection of J and E. But the old narrative had a firm
hold of the popular imagination and heart. And so the more
recent collection was combined with the other two, being used as
the groundwork of the whole, especially in chronology. It is
that combined narrative which we now possess.
J. A. HOWLETT
Abraham (In Liturgy)
Abraham (in Liturgy)
While of peculiar interest to the liturgiologist (especially in
the classification of the liturgies of the East and of the West,
as is noted below under MISSAL), the inclusion of noted names of
the Old Testament in the liturgies of Christian Churches must be
a subject of sufficiently general interest to warrant some brief
notice here. Of all the names thus used, a special prominence
accrues to those of Abel, Melchisedech, Abraham through their
association with the idea of sacrifice and their employment in
this connection in the most solemn part of the Canon of the Mass
in the Roman rite. The inclusion in the Litany for the Dying
(Roman Ritual) of only two (Abel and Abraham) out of all the
great names of the Old Testament must give these a special
prominence in the eyes of the faithful, but of these two, again,
the name of Abraham occurs so often and in such a variety of
connections, as to make his position in the liturgy one of very
decided pre-eminence. Of first interest will be the present use
of the word Abraham in the Roman liturgy:
Martyrology (9th October)
"Eodem die memoria S. Abrahae Patriarchae et omnium credentium
Patris" (The same day, the memory of S. Abraham Patriarch and
Father of all believers).
Ritual
(a) In the Ordo commendationis animae (Recommendation of a soul
departing), the brief litany includes but two names from the Old
Testament, that of the Baptist belonging to the New Testament:
Holy Mary, pray for him.
All ye holy Angels and Archangels, pray for him.
Holy Abel, pray for him.
All ye choirs of the just, pray for him.
Holy Abraham, pray for him.
St. John Baptist, pray for him.
St. Joseph, pray for him.
In the Libera (Deliver, etc.), which follows shortly after, many
names of the Old Testament are mentioned, including Abraham, but
omitting Abel: "Deliver . . . as thou didst deliver Abraham from
Ur of the Chaldeans".
(b) Benedictio peregrinorum (Blessing of pilgrims etc.). The
second prayer reads: "O God, who didst guide Abraham safely
through all the ways of his journey from Ur of the Chaldeans....
Breviary
(a) On Septuagesima Sunday the lessons from Scripture begin with
the first verse of Genesis, and the formal narrative of Abraham
begins with Quinquagesima Sunday, the lessons ending on Shrove
Tuesday with the sacrifice of Melchisedech.
(b) The antiphon to the Magnificat on Passion Sunday is:
"Abraham your father rejoiced . . ." (John, viii, 56). Again,
the first antiphon of the second nocturn of the Common of
Apostles reads: "The princes of the people are gathered together
with the God of Abraham". The occurrence of the name in the last
verse of the Maynificat itself: "As he spake to our fathers, to
Abraham and his seed forever" and in the Benedictus (sixth
verse): "The oath which he swore to Abraham our father . . ."
make the name of daily occurrence in the Divine Office, as these
two Canticles are sung daily the former at Vespers, the latter
at Lauds. In the Psaltery, also, recited during every week, the
name occurs in Pss., xlvi, 10; civ, 9, 42. See also the third
strophe of the hymn Quicumque Christum quaeritis (Vespers of
Transfiguration D. N. J. C. and various Lessons in the Nocturns,
e.g. Feria 3a infra Hebd. vi p. Pent., Feria 3a infra oct. Corp.
Christi, 2d nocturn).
Missal
(a) The third of the twelve lessons called " Prophecies" read on
Holy Saturday between the lighting of the Paschal Candle and the
Blessing of the Font deals wholly with the sacrifice of Isaac
imposed upon Abraham. The lesson (Gen., xxii, 1-19) is, like the
others, not only read quietly by the priest at the altar, but
also chanted in a loud voice simultaneously by a cleric. The
dramatic incidents thus rehearsed must have impressed the
catechumens deeply, as is evidenced by the reproduction of the
incidents on the walls of catacombs and on sarcophagi. The
lesson is followed by a prayer: "O God, the supreme Father of
the faithful, who throughout the world didst multiply the
children of thy promise . . . and by the paschal mystery dost
make Abraham thy servant the father of all nations...."
(b) Again, in the prayer after the fourth lesson: "O God, grant
that the fulness of the whole world may pass over to the
children of Abraham...."
(c) The Epistle of the thirteenth Sun day after Pentecost: "To
Abraham were the promises made.... But God gave it to Abraham by
promise...." (Gal., iii, 16-22).
(d) Offertory of the Mass for the Dead: "O Lord . . . may the
holy standard-bearer Michael introduce them to the holy light
which Thou didst promise of old to Abraham...."
(e) In the Nuptial Mass, the blessing reads: "May the God of
Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, be with you . . ."
(f) Of greater interest than anything thus far cited is the
prayer in the Canon of the Mass, when the priest extends his
hands over the Consecrated Species: "Upon which do Thou
vouchsafe to look . . . and accept them, as Thou didst vouchsafe
to accept the gift of Thy just servant Abel, and the sacrifice
of our Patriarch Abraham...." Here the Canon insists on the idea
of sacrifice, a fact common to Western liturgies, while those of
the East, except the Maronite, omit in their epicleses all
reference to the typic sacrifices of the Old Testament, and
appear concerned with impressing the faithful with the idea
rather of sacrament and communion. This is esteemed a fact of
capital importance towards a classification of the liturgies.
(g) In the Sequence of Corpus Christi while Abraham is not
named, his sacrifice (unbloody, like that of the altar) is
commemorated in the lines In figuris praesignatur, Cum Isaac
immolatur....
Pontifical
In one of the Prefaces of the Consecration of an altar we read:
"May it have as much grace with Thee as that which Abraham, the
father of faith, built when about to sacrifice his son as a
figure of our redemption . . ." Again, in the Blessing of a
Cemetery (third Prayer) and in connection with Isaac and Jacob
(sixth Prayer). Finally, in two of the Prayers for the Blessing
and Coronation of a King. The exalted position of Abraham in
Sacred History, and the frequent use of his name in invocations
etc. in the Old Testament (e. g. Gen. xxviii, 13; xxxii, 9;
xlviii, 15,16; Exod., iii, 6,15,16, iv, 5; Tob., vii, 15 etc.),
and the continued use thereof by the early Christians (Acts,
iii, 13; vii, 32) made his name of frequent occurrence in
prayers, exorcisms and even amongst Pagans, ignorant of the
significance of the formula "God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God
of Jacob" etc., in magical rites and incantations, as Origen
testifies.
H.T. HENRY
The Bosom of Abraham
The Bosom of Abraham
In the Holy Bible, the expression "the Bosom of Abraham" is
found only in two verses of St. Luke's Gospel (xvi, 22, 23). It
occurs in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus the imagery of
which is plainly drawn from the popular representations of the
unseen world of the dead which were current in Our Lord's time.
According to the Jewish conceptions of that day, the souls of
the dead were gathered into a general tarrying-place the Sheol
of the Old Testament literature, and the Hades of the New
Testament writings (cf. Luke, xvi, 22 in the Gr. xvi, 23). A
local discrimination, however, existed among them, according to
their deeds during their mortal life. In the unseen world of the
dead the souls of the righteous occupied an abode or compartment
of their own which was distinctly separated by a wall or a chasm
from the abode or compartment to which the souls of the wicked
were consigned. The latter was a place of torments usually
spoken of as Gehenna (cf. Matt., v, 29, 30; xviii, 9- Mark, ix,
42 sqq. in the Latin Vulgate)- the other, a place of bliss and
security known under the names of "Paradise" (cf. Luke, xxiii,
43) and "the Bosom of Abraham" (Luke, xvi, 22 23). And it is in
harmony with these Jewish conceptions that Our Lord pictured the
terrible fate of the selfish Rich Man, and on the contrary, the
glorious reward of the patient Lazarus. In the next life Dives
found himself in Gehenna, condemned to the most exeruciating tor
ments, whereas Lazarus was carried by the angels into "the Bosom
of Abraham", where the righteous dead shared in the repose and
felicity of Abraham "the father of the faithful". But while
commentators generally agree upon the meaning of the figurative
expression "the Bosom of Abraham", as designating the blissful
abode of the righteous souls after death, they are at variance
with regard to the manner in which the phrase itself originated.
Up to the time of Maldonatus (A.D. 1583), its origin was traced
back to the universal custom of parents to take up into their
arms, or place upon their knees, their children when they are
fatigued, or return home, and to make them rest by their side
during the night (cf. II Kings, xii, 2; III Kings, iii, 20;
xvii, 19; Luke, xi, 7 sqq.), thus causing them to enjoy rest and
security in the bosom of a loving parent. After the same manner
was Abraham supposed to act towards his children after the
fatigues and troubles of the present life, hence the
metaphorical expression "to be in Abraham's Bosom" as meaning to
be in repose and happiness with him. But according to Maldonatus
(In Lucam, xvi, 22), whose theory has since been accepted by
many scholars, the metaphor "to be in Abraham's Bosom" is
derived from the custom of reclining on couches at table which
prevailed among the Jews during and before the time of Christ.
As at a feast each guest leaned on his left elbow so as to leave
his right arm at liberty, and as two or more lay on the same
couch, the head of one man was near the breast of the man who
lay behind, and he was therefore said "to lie in the bosom" of
the other. It was also considered by the Jews of old a mark of
special honour and favour for one to be allowed to lie in the
bosom of the master of the feast (cf. John 13:23). And it is by
this illustration that they pictured the next world. They
conceived of the reward of the righteous dead as a sharing in a
banquet given by Abraham, "the father of the faithful" (cf.
Matt., viii, 11 sqq.), and of the highest form of that reward as
lying in "Abraham's Bosom". Since the coming of Our Lord, "the
Bosom of Abraham" gradually ceased to designate a place of
imperfect happiness, and it has become synonymous with Heaven
itself. In their writings the Fathers of the Church mean by that
expression sometimes the abode of the righteous dead before they
were admitted to the Beatific Vision after the death of the
Saviour, sometimes Heaven, into which the just of the New Law
are immediately introduced upon their demise. When in her
liturgy the Church solemnly prays that the angels may carry the
soul of one of her departed children to "Abraham's Bosom", she
employs the expression to designate Heaven and its endless bliss
in company with the faithful of both Testaments, and in
particular with Abraham, the father of them all. This passage of
the expression "the Bosom of Abraham" from an imperfect and
limited sense to one higher and fuller is a most natural one,
and is in full harmony with the general character of the New
Testament dispensation as a complement and fulfilment of the Old
Testament revelation.
FRANCIS E. GIGOT
Abraham a Sancta Clara
Abraham a Sancta Clara
A Discalced Augustinian friar, preacher, and author of popular
books of devotion, b. at Messkirch, Baden, 1644; d. 1 December,
1709. The eighth of nine children born to Matthew Megerlin, or
Megerle, a well-to-do serf who kept a tavern in
Kreenheinstetten, he received in Baptism the name John Ulrich.
At the age of six he attended the village school in his native
place, and about three years later he began his Latin studies in
Messkirch. During the years 1656-59, he passed successively
through the three classes of the Jesuit untergymnasium in
Ingolstadt. At his father's death, which occurred about this
time, the boy was adopted by his uncle, Abraham von Megerlin,
canon of Altoetting, who removed him to the Benedictine school
in Salzburg. In the fall of 1662, at the age of 18, John joined
the Discalced Augustinians at the age Vienna, choosing the name
Abraham doubtless out of respect to his uncle with the addition
a Sancta Clara. He made his novitiate and completed his
theological studies at Mariabrunn, not far from Vienna. On his
ordination in Vienna (1666) he was sent, after a brief
preparation, as preacher to the shrine of Taxa, near Augsburg,
but after about three years he was recalled to Vienna, a centre
of greater activity. On 28 April, 1677, he was appointed
imperial court preacher by Leopold I, and while holding this
office experienced the terrors of the year of the plague, 1679.
After a rest of five months as chaplain to the Land marshal of
Lower Austria, he once more ascended the pulpit. For the year
1680 he is recorded as being prior of the convent at Vienna,
while two years later we find him chaplain to the monastic
church of his order in Gratz, where he remained three years as
Sunday preacher, and later as prior. It was in this capacity
that he went to Rome in 1687. In 1690 he is mentioned once more
by the house chronicle of the Vienna monastery as court
preacher, and the following year as having the rank of
provincial. In this capacity he undertook his second journey to
Rome (1692), where he took part in the general chapter of his
order. Upon his return he took up his customary duties, besides
filling the office of definitor. He eventually became the
definitor provinciae. These manifold sustained exertions,
however, had gradually undermined his strength, still further
impaired by years of suffering from gout, and finally resulted
in his death. Abraham had at his command an amazingly large
amount of information which, with an abundant wit in keeping
with the taste of his time, made him an effective preacher. His
peculiar talent lay in his faculty for presenting religious
truths, even the most bitter, with such graphic charm that every
listener, both high and low, found pleasure in his discourse,
even though certain of his contemporaries expressed themselves
with great virulence against "the buffoon, the newsmonger, and
the harlequin of the pulpit." Even in his character of author,
he stands as it were in the pulpit, and speaks to his readers by
means of his pen. His works are numerous. His first occasion for
literary work was furnished by the plague, on which he wrote
three treatises. Merk's, Wien! or a detailed description of
destructive death (Vienna, 1680), shows how death spares neither
priests, nor women, nor learned men, nor married people, nor
soldiers. The second tract, Loesch Wien (Vienna, 1680), which is
less powerful, exhorts the survivors of the plague to extinguish
with their good works the torments of Purgatory for those who
had fallen victims. Die grosse Totenbruderschaft (1681)
enumerates the people of prominence who died in 1679-80, in
order to illustrate forcibly, and almost rudely, the reflection
"that after death the prince royal is as frightfully noisome as
the newborn child of the peasant." Similarly based on a critical
event of history was the little book entitled Auf, auf, ihr
Christen (Vienna, 1683), a stirring exhortation to Christians in
arms against the Turk. This has become chiefly celebrated as the
original of the sermon in the Wallenstein's Lager of Schiller. A
collection of sermons which had been actually preached appeared
in Salzburg in 1684 under the title of Reim dich, oder ich lis
dich. In the following year a little pilgrimage book was printed
for the monastery of Taxa entitled Gaik, Gaik, Gaik a Ga einer
wunderseltsamen Hennen. This grotesque title arose from the
story of the origin of the monastery, according to which a
picture of the Blessed Virgin was seen imprinted on a hen's egg.
Abraham's masterpiece, the fruit of ten years' labour, is Judas
der Erzschelm ( Judas, the archknave, Salzburg, 1686-95). This
treats of the apocryphal life of the traitor Judas, and is
varied with many moral reflections. While still at work upon
this extensive book, he published a compendium of Catholic moral
teaching, Grammatica religiosa (Salzburg, 1691), consisting of
fifty-five lessons, and embracing the themes of thirty-three
sermons. This appeared in a German translation (Cologne, 1699).
The remaining works of the celebrated barefoot preacher are for
the most part a confused mixture of verses, reflections, and
sermons. Thus: Etwas fuer alle ( Something for All Persons;
Wuerzburg, 1699); Sterben und Erben (Death and Inheritance;
Amsterdam, 1702); Neu eroeffnete Welt-Galleria (Newly-Opened
World-Gallery; Nuernberg, 1703); Heilsames Gemisch-Gemasch (A
Salutary Mix-Mash; Wuerzburg, 1704); Huy! und Pfuy der Welt (Ho!
And Fie on the World; Wuerzburg, 1707). All these treatises
showed the influence of Sebastian Brant's Narrenschiff (Ship of
Fools), which was even more apparent in the two following works:
Centifolium stultorum in Quarto (A Hundred excellent fools in
Quarto; Vienna, 1709), and Wunderwuerdiger Traum von einem
grossen Narrenest (Wonderful Dream of a Great Nest of Fools,
Salzburg, 1710; also printed during the lifetime of Abraham). A
year after his death there appeared Geistliche Kramerladen
(Spiritual Haberdasher's Shop); Wohl angefuellter Weinkeller (A
Well-filled Wine-cellar; Wuerzburg); and Besonders meublirt und
gezierte Toten-Kapelle (A Strangely Furnished and Adorned
Mortuary Chapel; Nuernberg). Five quarto volumes of his literary
remains were published posthumously: Abrahamisches Bescheidessen
(Abraham's Honour Feasts; Vienna, Br nn, 1717); Abrahamische
Lauberhutt (Abraham's Leafclad Arbour; Vienna and Nuernberg,
1721-23); Abrahamisches Gehab dich wohl! (Abraham's Farewell;
Nuernberg, 1729). A collective edition of his works appeared
(Passau, 1835-46) in nineteen octavo volumes. Schiller, a
Swabian compatriot of Abraham, has passed this interesting
judgment on the literary monk in a letter to Goethe: "This
Father Abraham is a man of wonderful originality, whom we must
respect, and it would be an interesting, though not at all an
easy, task to approach or surpass him in mad wit and
cleverness." Moreover, Schiller was greatly influenced by
Abraham; even more were Jean Paul Richter and other lesser
minds. Even to the most recent times Abraham's influence is
chiefly noticeable in the literature of the pulpit, though but
little to its advantage. To honour the memory of Abraham the
city of Vienna has begun a new edition of his works.
VON KARAJAN, Abraham a Sancta Clara (Vienna, 1867) (still the
best work on the celebrated monk); SCHERER, Vortrage und
Aufsatze zur Geschichte des geistlichen Lebens in Deutschland
und osterreich (Berlin, 1874); ID., MARETA, on Abraham in the
Allgemeine deutsche Biographie; MARETA uber Judas den Erzschelm,
in Programm des Schottengymnasium (Vienna, 1875); BOBERTAG,
Abraham a Sancta Clara, Judas der Erzschelm, in KURSCHNER'S
Deutsche National literatur; BLANlKENBURG, Studien uber die
Sprache Abrahams a Sancta Clara (Halle, 1897); NAGL, Die
erziehische Einwirkung Abrahams a Sancta Clara auf das
osterreicherische Volk in DITTES Paedagogium (1891); NAGL AND
ZEIDLER, Deutsch-sterreichische Literatur Geschichte (Vienna,
1899) 621-651.
N. SCHEID
Abraham Ecchelensis
Abraham Ecchelensis
A learned Maronite, born in Hekel, or Ecchel (hence his
surname), a village on Mount Lebanon, in 1600; died 1664 in
Rome. He studied at the Maronite College in Rome, published a
Syriac grammar (1628), and taught Syriac and Arabic at the
College of the Propaganda. In 1630 he began to teach the same
languages in the Royal College Paris, and to assist in editing
Le Jay's "Polyglot Bible", working with Gabriel Sionita on the
Syriac and Arabic texts and their Latin translation. He
contributed III Mach. in Arabic, and Ruth in Syriac and Arabic,
with a Latin translation. Abraham and Gabriel soon quarrelled,
and the former wrote three letters explaining this difference,
and defending his work against its depreciators, especially
Valerian Flavigny. In 1642 he resumed his teaching in Rome, but
returned to Paris in 1645; after eight years he again went to
Rome, where he remained until his death. Among his many works we
may mention: a "Synopsis of Arab Philosophy" (Paris, 1641); some
disciplinary canons of the Council of Nice, according to Eastern
attribution, though unknown to the Latin and Greek churches
(Paris, 1641) "Abr. Ecchellensis et Leon. Allatii Concordantia
Nationum Christianarum Orientalium in Fidei Catholicae Dogmate"
(Mainz, 1655); "De Origine nominis Papae, necnon de illius
Proprietate in Romano Pontifice, adeoque de ejus Primatu contra
Joannem Seldenum Anglum" (Rome, 1660); "Epistola ad J. Morinum
de variis Graecorum et Orientalium ritibus"; "Chronicon
Orientale nunc primum Latinitate donatum, cui Accessit
Supplementum Historiae orientalis (Paris, 1653); "Catalogus
librorum Chaldaeorum tam Eccl. quam profanor., Auctore
Hebed-Jesu Latinitate Donatus et Notis Illustratus" (Rome,1653);
a "Life of St. Anthony"; a Latin translation of Abulfath's
"Paraphrase of Apollonius' Conic Sections, 5, 6, and 7."
A.J. MAAS
Abrahamites
Abrahamites
(1) Syrian heretics of the ninth century. They were called
Brachiniah by the Arabs, from the name of their head, Ibrahim,
or Abraham of Antioch. They denied the Divinity of Christ, and
were looked on by some as allied to the Paulicians.
(2) A sect of Bohemian Deists. They claimed that they held what
had been Abraham's religion before his circumcision. They
believed in one God, but rejected the Trinity, original sin, and
the perpetuity of punishment for sin, and accepted nothing of
the Bible save only the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer.
On their refusal to adopt some one of the religions tolerated in
Bohemia, Joseph II banished them to Transylvania in 1783. Some
became converted later on to the Catholic Faith. There are still
found in Bohemia some whose religious belief suggests that of
the Abrahamites.
(3) Martyrs in the time of the Byzantine Emperor Theophilus,
when a persecution of Catholics took place on account of the
revival of the heresy of the Iconoclasts. At this time there was
a monastery of monks in Constantinople called St. Abraham's.
When the Emperor called on them to renounce the cult of holy
images they defended the practice with great zeal, and were
consequently subjected (832) to martyrdom.
Kirchenlex., I, 119, 120.
JOHN J. A' BECKET
Nicholas Abram
Nicholas Abram
Jesuit theologian, born in 1589, at Xaronval, in Lorraine; died
7 September, 1655. He taught rhetoric at Pont-`a-Mousson, then
engaged in missionary work, and finally taught theology at
Pont-`a-Mousson for seventeen years. His principal works are:
+ "Nonni Panopolitani Paraphrasis Sancti secundum Joannem
Evangelii. Accesserunt Notae P.N.A., Soc. Jes." (Paris, 1623);
+ "Commentarii in P. Virgilii Maronis Bucolica et Georgica.
Accessit diatriba de quatuor fluviis et loco paradisi"
(Pont-`a-Mousson, 1633-35);
+ "Pharus Veteris Testamenti, sive sacrarum quaestionum libri
XV. Quibus accesserunt ejusdem auctoris de veritate et
mendacio libri IV" (Paris, 1648). This is the principal
exegetical work of Father N. Abram.
His other works may he found in Sommervogel "Bibliotheque de la
compagnie de Jesus" (Brussels, 1890).
A.J. MAAS
Abrasax
Abrasax
The study of Abrasax is, at first sight, as discouraging as it
is possible to imagine. The name has been given to a class of
ancient stone articles, of small dimensions, inscribed with
outlandish figures and formulas, sometimes wholly
indecipherable, specimens of which are to be found in almost
every museum and private collection. These, for the most part,
have hitherto resisted all attempts at interpretation, though it
would be rash to conclude that a fuller knowledge may not solve
enigmas which remain closed to us. The true name, moreover, is
Abrasax, and not, as incorrectly written, Abraxas, a reading due
to the confusion made by the Latins between Sigma and Xi. Among
the early Gnostics, Abrasax appears to have had various
meanings. Basilides gave this title to Almighty God, and claimed
that the numerical value of its letters gave the sum of 365,
because the Abrasax is enclosed in the solar cycle. Sometimes
the number 365 signifies the series of the heavens. In view of
such imaginings, it is easy to guess at the course taken by an
untrammelled Gnostic fancy, whereby its adherents strove to
discover the meaning of the mysterious word. It is, however, an
error to give the name Abrasax to all stones of Gnostic origin,
as has been done up to the present day. It is not the name which
applies to talismans, any more than the names of Jupiter and
Venus apply to all ancient statues indiscriminately. Abrasax is
the name given by the Gnostics to the Supreme Deity, and it is
quite possible that we shall find a clue to its etymological
meaning in the influences of numbers. The subject is one which
has exercised the ingenuity of many savants, but it may be said
that all the engraved stones to which the name is commonly given
fall into three classes: (1) Abrasax, or stones of Basilidian
origin; (2) Abrasaxtes, or stones originating in ancient forms
of worship, and adapted by the Gnostics to their peculiar
opinions; (3) Abraxoides, or stones absolutely unconnected with
the doctrine of Basilides. Bellermann, following Montfaucon,
made a tentative classification of Gnostic stones, which,
however, is nowadays looked upon as wholly inadequate. His
mistake consisted in wishing, as it were, to make a frontal
attack on Gnosticism. Kopp, endowed with greater skill and
patience, seems to have realized in some measure how wide the
problem actually is. Ad. Franck and, quite lately, Moses Schwab
have made diligent researches in the direction of the Cabbala.
"The demonology devised by the Cabbalists"; according to the
former writer, "was nothing more than a carefully thought out
personification of the different degrees of life and
intelligence which they perceived in external nature. All
natural growths, forces, and phenomena are thus typified." The
outline here furnished needs only to be extended indefinitely in
order to take in quite easily the countless generations of
Gnosticism. The whole moral and physical world, analyzed and
classified with an inconceivable minuteness, will find place in
it. Thence, also, will issue the bewildering catalogues of
Gnostic personalities. The chief difficulty, however, arises
from the nomenclature of Gnosticism, and here the "Sepher
Raziel" supplies a first and valuable hint. "To succeed in the
operations of divination", it says, "it is necessary to
pronounce the mystic names of the planets or of the earth." In
fact, stones of Gnostic origin often show designs made up out of
the initial letters of the planets. Another parallel is still
more suggestive. The Jews, as is well known, would never
pronounce the Ineffable Name, Jehovah, but substituted either
another name or a paraphrase; a rule which applied, not only to
the Ineffable Name and its derivatives, but to others as well,
ending, in order to evade the difficulty which arose, in a
series of fantastic sounds which at first seem simply the
outcome of a hopeless confusion. It became necessary to resort
to permutations, to the use of other letters, to numerical and
formal equivalents. The result was an outlandish vocabulary,
only partially accounted for, yet one which nevertheless reveals
in Gnosticism the existence of something more than mere
incoherences. Very many secrets of Gnosticism remain
unexplained, but it may be hoped that they will not always be
shrouded in mystery.
KING, The Gnostics and their Remains (London, 1887); BELLERMANN,
Versuch uber die Gemmen der Alten mit dem Abraxas-Bilde (Berlin,
1817-19); DIETERICH, Die Abraxas (Leipzig, 1892); LECLERCQ, in
Dict. d'archeol. chret. et de liturgie, I, 127 sq.; MATTER,
Hist. du gnosticisme (Paris, 1843); MONTFAUCON, L'antiquite
expliquee (Paris, 1722), II, 2, 353.
H. LECLERCQ
Absalom
Absalom
( Abhshalom in Hebrew; Abessalom, Apsalomos in Greek).
The name of several distinguished persons mentioned in the Old
Testament (Kings, Par., Mach.), interpreted "The Father of
Peace."
(1) Absalom, Son of David
He is third in the order mentioned by the chronicler (II Kings,
iii, 2, 3) of the sons born at Hebron during the first turbulent
years of David's reign over Judah, when Isboseth, son of Saul,
still claimed by right of inheritance to rule over Israel. His
mother was Maacha, daughter of Tholmai, King of Gessur. The
sacred writer who sketches for us the career of Absalom (II
Kings, xiii-xviii) lays stress upon the faultless beauty of the
youth's appearance, and mentions in particular the luxurious
wealth of his hair, which, when shorn, weighed over ten ounces.
The significance of this latter note becomes apparent when we
remember the important part which the culture of the hair played
in the devotions of the Eastern people (note even at this day
the ceremonial prayers of the Dervishes). As shaving the head
was a sign of mourning, so offering a comely growth of hair to
the priest was a token of personal sacrifice akin to the annual
offering of the first fruits in the sanctuary. Probably the
chronicler had also in mind that it was this gift of nature
which became the occasion of Absalom's fatal death. To a
pleasing exterior the youth Absalom joined a temperament which,
whilst fond of display, was nevertheless reserved, bold, and
thoughtful. These qualifications were calculated to nourish a
natural desire to be one day the representative of that
magnificent power created by his father, from the prospective
enjoyment of which his minority of birth alone seemed to debar
him. Despite his ambition, there appears to have been in the
youth that generous instinct of honour which inspires noble
impulses where these do not clash with the more inviting
prospects of self-interest. Under such circumstances it is not
strange that Absalom, idolized by those around him, whilst his
natural sense of gratitude and filial duty became gradually
dulled, was led to cultivate that species of egotism which grows
cruel in proportion as it counts upon the blind affection of its
friends.
There were other causes which alienated Absalom from his father.
David's eldest son, Amnon, born of a Jezrahelite mother, and
prospective heir to the throne by reason of his seniority, had
conceived a violent passion for Thamar, Absalom's beautiful
sister. Unable to control his affection, yet prevented from
gaining access to her by the conventionalities of the royal
court, which separated the King's wives and kept Thamar in her
mother's household, Amnon, on the advice of his cousin Jonadab,
feigns illness, and upon being visited by the King, his father,
requests that Thamar be permitted to nurse him. It was thus that
Amnon found opportunity to wrong the innocence of his
stepsister. Having injured the object of his passion, he
forthwith begins to hate her, and sends from him the aggrieved
maiden, who must be to him a constant reminder of his
wrongdoing. Thamar, departing in the bitterness of her sorrow,
is met by Absalom, who forces from her the secret of Amnon's
violence to her. David is informed, but, apparently unwilling to
let the disgrace of his prospective heir become public, fails to
punish the crime. This gives Absalom the pretext for avenging
his sister's wrong, for which now not only Amnon, the heir to
the throne, but also David appears responsible to him. He takes
Thamar into his house and quietly but determinedly lays his
plan. The sacred writer states that Absalom never spoke to
Amnon, neither good words nor evil, but he hated him with a
hatred unto death.
For two years Absalom thus carried his resentment in silence,
when at length he found occasion to act openly. From the days of
the patriarchs it had been customary among the shepherd princes
of Israel to celebrate as a public festival of thanksgiving the
annual sheep-shearing. The first clip of the flocks was ordained
for the priests (Deut., xviii, 4), and the sacredness of the
feast made it difficult for any member of the tribal family to
absent himself. The sacred writer does not state that there was
in the mind of David a secret suspicion that Absalom meditated
mischief, but to one whose in sight into past and future events
was so clear as that of the Royal Seer, it might easily have
occurred that there had been in the days of his forefather,
Jacob, another Thamar (Gen., xxxviii, 6) who figured at a
sheep-shearing, and who found means of avenging a similar wrong
against herself, though in a less bloody way than that
contemplated by Absalom on the present occasion. Although David
excuses himself from attending the great sheep-shearing, he
eventually yields to Absalom's entreaty to send Amnon there to
represent him. The festive reunion of the royal household takes
place at Baalhasor, in a valley east of the road that leads to
Sichem, near Ephraim. When the banquet is at its height, and
Amnon has fairly given himself over to the pleasures of wine, he
is suddenly overpowered by the trusted servants of Absalom, and
slain. The rest of the company flee. Absalom himself escapes the
inevitable anger of his father by seeking refuge in the home of
his maternal grandfather at Gessur. Here he hopes to remain
until, the grief of his father having died out, he might be
forgiven and recalled to the royal court. But David does not
relent so quickly. After three years of banishment, Absalom,
through the intervention of Joab, David's nephew and trusted
general is allowed to return to the city, without, however,
being permitted to enter the King's presence. In this condition
Absalom lives for two years, seeking all the while to regain
through the instrumentality of Joab the favour of his father.
Joab himself is reluctant to press the matter, until Absalom, by
setting fire to the crops of his kinsman, forces Joab to come to
him with a view of seeking redress for the injury. Absalom turns
the opportunity of this altercation with Joab to good account by
pleading his own neglected and humiliated condition: I would
rather die ignominiously, he argues, than have this rancour of
the King against me all the days of my life. As a result Absalom
is received by the King.
Restored to his former princely dignity and the apparent
confidence of his father, Absalom now enters upon that course of
secret plotting to which his ambition and his opportunity seemed
to urge him, and which has stamped his name as a synonym of
unnatural revolt. By ingratiating himself in the good will of
the people, and at the same time fostering discontent with the
conditions of his father's reign, he succeeds in preparing the
minds of the disaffected for a general uprising. After four
years [the Septuagint has "forty", which is evidently a
misreading, as appears from the Hebrew ( Keri), Syriac, and
Arabic versions] of energetic secret activity, Absalom asks
leave of the King to repair to Hebron, that he might fulfil a
self-imposed vow made while in captivity at Gessur. Preparations
had already been consummated for a simultaneous uprising of the
secret adherents of Absalom in different parts of the country,
and emissaries were ready to proclaim the new king. Achitophel,
one of David's oldest counsellors, had joined the conspirators,
and by his design a strong current was being directed against
David. When, amid the sound of trumpets and the shouts of the
military, the proclamation of the new king reaches David, he
quickly assembles his trusted followers and flies towards Mount
Olivet, hoping to cross the Jordan in time to escape the
ambitious fury of his son. On the way he meets his faithful
officer Chusai, whom he advises to join Absalom.
"You will be of no use to me if you go with us. But if you join
Absalom, and say to him: I am thy follower, O King, as once I was
thy father's, he will receive thee, and thou wilt have it in thy
power to frustrate the designs of Achitophel who has betrayed me."
Chusai acts on the advice, and succeeds in gaining the
confidence of Absalom. So skilfully does he play his role as
adherent of the rebel party that his suggestion, pretending the
uselessness of pursuing David, prevails against the urgent
counsel of Achitophel, who urges Absalom to attack the King,
lest he gain time to organize his bodyguard, lately strengthened
by the accession of six hundred Gethaean soldiers. The event
proves the accuracy of Achitophel's foresight. David is secretly
informed of Absalom's delay, and forthwith sends his three
generals, Joab, Abisai, and Ethai, to attack the rebel hosts
from the eastern side of the hill. Shielded by a forest, David's
men proceed and meet Absalom's unguarded forces on the edge of
the woods which fringe the circular plain at a point marked by
the present site (presumably) of Mukaah. A frightful slaughter
ensues, and the disorganized rebel party is quickly routed.
Absalom madly flies. Suddenly he finds himself stunned by a blow
while his head is caught in the fork of the low hanging branches
of a terebinth tree. At the same time his long loose hair
becomes entangled in the thick foliage, whilst the frightened
animal beneath him rushes on, leaving him suspended above the
ground. Before he is able to extricate himself he is espied by
one of the soldiers, who, mindful of the King's words, "Spare me
the life of Absalom", directs Joab's attention to the plight of
the hapless youth. The old general, less scrupulous, and eager
to rid his master of so dangerous a foe, thrice pierces the body
of Absalom with his javelin. When the news of Absalom's death is
brought to David, he is inconsolable.
"My son Absalom, Absalom my son: would to God that I might die for
thee, Absalom my son, my son Absalom."
The sacred text states that Absalom was buried under a great
heap of stones (II Kings, xviii, 17) near the scene of his
disaster. The traveller today is shown a tomb in Graeco-Jewish
style, east of the Kidron, which is designated as the sepulchre
of Absalom, but which is evidently of much later construction
and probably belongs to one of the Jewish kings of the Asmonean
period (Josephus, De Bello Jud., V, xii, 2). Absalom had three
sons, who died before him. He left a daughter Maacha (Thamar),
who was afterwards married to Roboam, son of Solomon (II Par.,
xi, 20), although there is some doubt as to the identity of this
name mentioned in the Book of Kings and in Paralipomenon.
(2) Absalom, father of Mathathias
(I Mach., xi, 70). Perhaps identical with Absalom, father of
Jonathan (I Mach., xiii, 11).
(3) Absalom, father of Jonathan
One of the two ambassadors whom Judas Machabeus sent to Lysias,
procurator of Antiochus (II Mach., xi, 17), identical with the
foregoing.
H.J. HEUSER
Absalon of Lund
Absalon of Lund
Also known as AXEL, a famous Danish prelate, b. in 1128, at
Finnestoe in Seeland; d. 21 March, 1201, in the Benedictine
monastery of Soroee (Sora) founded by his father. He was a
graduate of the University of Paris, and taught for a while in
the school of Ste. Genevieve. In 1158 he was made Bishop of
Roskilde, and in 1178 Archbishop of Lund, Primate of Denmark and
Sweden, and eventually Papal Legate. In this capacity he labored
zealously for the final extirpation of paganism in the
Scandinavian world, notably on the Isle of Ruegen, its last
stronghold. He exercised great political influence under King
Waldemar I (1155-81) and Canute VI. It was at his request that
Saxo Grammaticus composed his "Historiae Danicae Libri XVI". A
tribute to Absalon is found in the fourteenth book of that work.
HEFELE, in Kirchenlex., art. Axel , 1, 1708; monographs by
ESTRUP-MOHNIKE (Leipzig, 1832), and HAMMERICH (Copenhagen,
1863).
THOMAS J. SHAHAN
Absinthe
Absinthe
(Hebrew la'anah.)
Wormwood, known for its repulsive bitterness (Jer., ix, 15;
xxiii, 15; Deut., xxix, 18; Lam., iii, 19; Prov., V, 4).
Figuratively it stands for a curse or calamity (Lam., iii, 15),
or also for injustice (Amos, V, 7; vi, 13). In Apoc., viii, 11,
the Greek equivalent ho apsinthos is given as a proper name to
the star which fell into the waters and made them bitter. The
Vulgate renders the Hebrew expression by absinithium, except in
Deut., xxix, 18, where it translates it amaritudo. It seems that
the biblical absinthe is identical with the Artemisia monosperma
(Delile), or the Artemisia herba-alba (ASSO); or, again, the
Artemisia juidaica Linne. (See PLANTS IN BIBLE.)
HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); VIGOUROUX, in Dict. de la
Bible (Paris, 1895); TRISTAM, Natural History of the Bible
(London, 1889).
A.J. MAAS
The Absolute
The Absolute
A term employed in modern philosophy with various meanings, but
applied generally speaking to the Supreme Being. It signifies
(1) that which is complete and perfect; (2) that which exists by
its own nature and is consequently independent of everything
else; (3) that which is related to no other being; (4) the sum
of all being, actual and potential (Hegel). In the first and the
second of these significations the Absolute is a name for God
which Christian philosophy may readily accept. Though the term
was not current in the Middle Ages, equivalent expressions were
used by the Scholastic writers in speaking, e.g. of God as Pure
Actuality ( Actus Purus), as uncaused Being, or as containing
pre-eminently every perfection. St. Thomas, in particular,
emphasizes the absoluteness of God by, showing that he cannot be
classed under any genus or species, and that His esseuce is
identical with His existence. Aquinas also anticipates the
difficulties which arise from the use of the term Absolute in
the sense of unrelated being, and which are brought out quite
clearly in modern discussions, notably in that between Mill, as
critic of Sir William Hamilton's philosophy, and Mansel as its
defender. It was urged that the Absolute could not consistently
be thought of or spoken of as First Cause, for the reason that
causation implies relation, and the Absolute is outside of all
relation; it cannot, therefore, be conceived as producing
effects. St. Thomas, however, offered a solution. He holds that
God and created things are related, but that the relation is
real in the effects only. It implies no conditioning or
modification of the Divine Being; it is in its application to,
God merely conceptual. The fashion of our thought obliges us to
conceive God as one term of a relation, but not to infer that
the relation affects Him as it affects the created thing which
is the other term. This distinction, moreover, is based on
experience. The process of knowledge involves a relation between
the known object and, the knowing subject, but the character of
the relation is not the same in both terms. In the mind it is
real because perception and thought imply the exercise of mental
faciilties, and consequently a modification of the mind itself.
No such modification, however, reaches the object; this is the
same whether we perceive it or not.
Now it is just here that a more serious difficulty arises. It is
claimed that the Absolute can neither be known nor conceived.
"To think is to condition"; and as the Absolute is by its very
nature unconditioned, no effort of thought can reach it. To say
that God is the Absolute is equivalent to saying that He is
unknowable. -- This view, expressed by Hamilton and Mansel, and
endorsed by Spencer in his "First Principles", affords an
apparently strong support to Agnosticism, while it assails both
the reasonableness and the possibility of religion. It is only a
partial reply to state that God, though incomprehensible, is
nevertheless knowable according to the manner and capacity of
our intelligence. The Agnostic contends that God, precisely
because He is the Absolute, is beyond the range of any knowledge
whatever on our part. Agnosticism, in other words, insists that
we must believe in the existence of an absolute and infinite
Being and at the same time warns us that we can have no idea of
that Being. Our belief must express itself in terms that are
meaningless. To avoid this conclusion one may reject altogether
a term out of which all significance has evaporated; or (and
this seems a wiser course) one may retrace the genesis of the
term and bold fast to the items of knowledge, however imperfect
and however in need of criticism, which that genesis involves.
In proving the existence of God as First Cause, or as Absolute
Being, we take as our starting-point facts that are knowable and
known. So far as, in reasoning upon these facts, we are led
beyond them to the concept of an Absolute, some remnant of the
knowableness which facts present must be found in that whichis
the ultimate explanation of the facts. If, as Spencer affirms,
"every one of the arguments by which the relativity of our
knowledge is demonstrated distinctly postulates the positive
existence of something beyond the relative", it follows that by
getting clearly before our thought the meaning of those
arguments and their force for distinctly postulating we must
obtain some knowledge of the Being whose existence is thus
established. Spencer, indeed, does not realize the full import
of the words "positive existence", "ultimate reality", and
"incomprehensible power", which he uses so freely. Otherwise he
could not consistently declare that the Being to which these
various predicates apply is unknowable. It is in fact remarkable
that so much knowledge of the Absolute is displayed in the
attempt to prove that the Absolute cannot be known. Careful
analysis of a concept like that of First Cause certainly shows
that it contains a wealth of meaning which forbids its
identification with the Unknowable, even supposing that the
positive existence of the Unknowable could be logically
demonstrated. Such an analysis is furnished by St. Thomas and by
other representatives of Christian philosophy. The method which
St. Thomas formulated, and which his successors adopted, keeps
steadily in view the requirements of critical thinking, and
especially the danger of applying the forms of our human
knowledge, without due refinement, to the Divine Being. The
warning against our anthropomorphic tendency was clearly given
before the Absolute had taken its actual place in philosophic
speculation, or had yielded that place to the Unknowable. While
this warning is always needful, especially in the interest of
religion, nothing can be gained by the attempt to form a concept
of God which offers a mere negation to thought and to worship.
It is of course equally futile to propose an unknowable Absolute
as the basis of reconciliation between religion and science. The
failure of Spencer's philosophy in this respect is the more
disastrous because, while it allows full scope to science in
investigating the manifestations of the Absolute, it sets aside
the claim of religion to learn anything of the power which is
thus manifested. (See AGNOSTICISM, ASEITY, ANALOGY, GOD,
KNOWLEDGE, THEOLOGY. For Hegel's conception of the Absolute, see
HEGELIANISM, IDEAISM, PANTHEISM.)
SCHUMACHER, The Knowableness of God (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1905),
contains good bibliography; ST. THOMAS, Summa, I, Q. xiii;
Contra Gentes, II, 12, 13; HAMILTON, Discussions (New York,
1860); MILL, An Examination of Sir W. Hamilton's Philosophy
(Boston, 1865); MANSEL, The Philosophy of the Conditioned
(London, 1866); CAIRD, An Introduction to the Philosophy of
Religion (Glasgow, 1901); ROYCE, The World and the Individual
(New York, 1900); FLINT, Agnosticism (New York, 1903).
E.A. PACE
Absolution
Absolution
( Ab = from; solvere = to free)
Absolution is the remission of sin, or of the punishment due to
sin, granted by the Church. (For remission of punishment due to
sin, see CENSURE, EXCOMMUNICATION, INDULGENCE.) Absolution
proper is that act of the priest whereby, in the Sacrament of
Penance, he frees man from sin. It presupposes on the part of
the penitent, contrition, confession, and promise at least of
satisfaction; on the part of the minister, valid reception of
the Order of Priesthood and jurisdiction, granted by competent
authority, over the person receiving the sacrament. That there
is in the Church power to absolve sins committed after baptism
the Council of Trent thus declares: "But the Lord then
principally instituted the Sacrament of Penance, when, being
raised from the dead, He breathed upon His disciples saying,
'Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they
are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are
retained.' By which action so signal, and words so clear the
consent of all the Fathers has ever understood that the power of
forgiving and retaining sins was communicated to the Apostles,
and to their lawful successors for the reconciling of the
faithful who have fallen after baptism" (Sess. XIV, i). Nor is
there lacking in divine revelation proof of such power; the
classical texts are those found in Matthew, xvi, 19; xviii, 18,
and in John, xx, 21-23. To Peter are given the keys of the
kingdom of heaven. Sin is the great obstacle to entrance into
the kingdom, and over sin Peter is supreme. To Peter and to all
the Apostles is given the power to bind and to loose, and this
again implies supreme power both legislative and judicial: power
to forgive sins, power to free from sin's penalties. This
interpretation becomes more clear in studying the rabbinical
literature, especially of Our Lord's time, in which the phrase
to bind and to loose was in common use. (Lightfoot, Horae
Hebraicae; Buxtorf, Lexicon Chald.; Knabenbauer, Commentary on
Matthew, II, 66; particularly Maas, St. Matthew, 183, 184.) The
granting of the power to absolve is put with unmistakable
clearness in St. John's Gospel: "He breathed upon them and said,
'Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins ye shall forgive they are
forgiven them; and whose sins ye shall retain, they are
retained'" (xx, 22, 23). It were foolish to assert that the
power here granted by Christ was simply a power to announce the
Gospel (Council of Trent, Sess. XIX, Can. iii), and quite as
unwise to contend that here is contained no power other than the
power to remit sin in the Sacrament of Baptism (Ibid., Sess.
XIV); for the very context is against such an interpretation,
and the words of the text imply a strictly judicial act, while
the power to retain sins becomes simply incomprehensible when
applied to baptism alone, and not to an action involving
discretionary judgment. But it is one thing to assert that the
power of absolution was granted to the Church, and another to
say that a full realization of the grant was in the
consciousness of the Church from the beginning. Baptism was the
first, the great sacrament, the sacrament of initiation into the
kingdom of Christ. Through baptism was obtained not only plenary
pardon for sin, but also for temporal punishment due to sin. Man
once born anew, the Christian ideal forbade even the thought of
his return to sin. Of a consequence, early Christian discipline
was loath to grant even once a restoration to grace through the
ministry of reconciliation vested in the Church. This severity
was in keeping with St. Paul's declaration in his Epistle to the
Hebrews: "For it is impossible for those who were once
illuminated, have tasted also the heavenly gift, and were made
partakers of the Holy Ghost, have moreover tasted the good word
of God, and the powers of the world to come and are fallen away,
to be renewed again to penance" etc. (vi, 4-6). The persistence
of this Christian ideal is very clear in the "Pastor" of Hermas,
where the author contends against a rigorist school, that at
least one opportunity for penance must be given by the Church
(III Sim., viii, 11). He grants only one such chance, but this
is sufficient to establish a belief in the power of the Church
to forgive sins committed after baptism. St. Ignatius in the
first days of the second century seemingly asserts the power to
forgive sins when he declares in his letter to the
Philadelphians that the bishop presides over penance. This
tradition was continued in the Syrian Church, as is evident from
passages found in Aphraates and Ephrem, and St. John Chrysostom
voices this same Syrian tradition when he writes "De Sacerdotio"
(Migne P. G., LXVII, 643), that "Christ has given to his priests
a power he would not grant to the angels, for he has not said to
them, 'Whatsoever ye bind, will be bound,'" etc.; and further
down he adds, "The Father hath given all judgment into the hands
of his Son, and the Son in turn has granted this power to his
priests."
Clement of Alexandria, who perhaps received his inspiration from
the "Pastor" of Hermas, tells the story of the young bandit whom
St. John went after and brought back to God, and in the story he
speaks of the "Angel of Penance", meaning the bishop or priest
who presided over the public penance. Following Clement in the
Catechetical school of Alexandria was Origen (230). In the
commentary on the words of the Lord's Prayer, "Forgive us our
trespasses", he alludes to the practice of penance in the
Church, recalling the text of John, xx, 21. He asserts that this
text is proof of the power to pardon sin conferred by Christ
upon His Apostles and upon their successors. True it is that in
writing of the extent of the power conferred, he makes exception
for the sins of idolatry and adultery, which he terms
irremissible, although Dionysius of Corinth (170) years before
held that no sin was excepted from the power of the keys granted
by Christ to His Church (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., iv, xxiii). In
the Alexandrian Church we have also the testimony of Athanasius,
who in a fragment against the Novatians pointedly asserts: "He
who confesses his sins, receives from the priest pardon for his
fault, in virtue of the grace of Christ (just as he who is
baptized)." Asia Minor is at an early date witness of this power
to absolve. St. Firmihan, in his famous letter to St. Cyprian,
asserts that the power to forgive sins was given to the Apostles
and to their successors (Epp. Cyp., LXXV), and this tradition is
more clearly expressed both in Basil and Gregory Nazianzen (P.
G., XXXI, 1284; XXXVI, 356, 357). The Roman tradition is clear
in the "Pastor" of Hermas, where the power to forgive sins
committed after baptism is defended (Sim., viii, 6, 5; ibid.,
ix, 19). This same tradition is manifest in the Canons of
Hippolytus, wherein the prelate consecrating a bishop is
directed to pray: "Grant him, O Lord, the power to forgive sins"
(xxii). This is still more clearly expressed in the
"Constitutiones Apostolicae" (P. G., I, 1073): "Grant him, O
Lord Almighty, by Thy Christ the fulness of Thy spirit, that he
may have the power to pardon sin, in accordance with Thy
command, that he may loose every bond which binds the sinner, by
reason of that power which Thou hast granted Thy Apostles." (See
also Duchesne, "Christian Worship", 439, 440.) True, this power
seems to Hermas to be strangely limited, while Origen,
Tertullian, and the followers of Novatian principles were
unwilling to grant that the Church had a right to absolve from
such sins as apostasy, murder, and adultery. However, Calixtus
settled the question for all time when he declared that in
virtue of the power of the keys, he would grant pardon to all
who did penance -- Ego . . . delicta poenitentia functis
dimitto, or again, Habet potestatem ecclesia delicta donandi (De
Pud., xxi). In this matter, see Tertullian, "De Pudicitia",
which is simply a vehement protest against the action of the
Pope, whom Tertullian accuses of presumption in daring to
forgive sins, and especially the greater crimes of murder,
idolatry, etc. -- " Idcirco praesumis et ad te derivasse
solvendi et alligandi potestatem, id est, ad omnem Ecclesiam
Petri propinquam." Tertullian himself, before becoming a
Montanist, asserts in the clearest terms that the power to
forgive sins is in the Church. "Collocavit Deus in vestibulo
poenitentiam januam secundam, quae pulsantibus patefaciat
[januam]; sed jam semel, quia jam secundo, sed amplius nunquam,
quia proxime frustra" (De Poenitentia, vii, 9, 10). Although
Tertullian limits the exercise of this power, he stoutly asserts
its existence, and clearly states that the pardon thus obtained
reconciles the sinner not only with the Church, but with God
(Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, I, note 3, 407). The whole Montanist
controversy is a proof of the position taken by the Church and
the Bishops of Rome; and the great Doctors of the West affirmed
in the strongest terms the power to absolve granted to the
priests of the Church by Christ. (Leo the Great, P. L., LIV,
1011-1013; Gregory the Great, P. L., LXVI, 1200; Ambrose, P. L.,
XV, 1639; XVI, 468, 477, etc.; Augustine, P. L., XXXIX,
1549-59.)
From the days, therefore, of Calixtus the power to absolve sins
committed after baptism is recognized as vested in the priests
of the Church in virtue of the command of Christ to bind and
loose, and of the power of the keys. At first this power is
timidly asserted against the rigorist party; afterwards stoutly
maintained. At first the sinner is given one opportunity for
pardon, and gradually this indulgence is extended; true, some
doctors thought certain sins unpardonable, save by God alone,
but this was because they considered that the existing
discipline marked the limits of the power granted by Christ.
After the middle of the fourth century, the universal practice
of public penance precludes any denial of a belief in the
Church's power to pardon the sinner, though the doctrine and the
practice of penance were destined to have a still further
expansion.
LATER PATRISTIC AGE
Following the golden age of the Fathers, the assertion of the
right to absolve and the extension of the power of the keys are
even more marked. The ancient sacramentaries -- Leonine,
Gelasian, Gregorian, the "Missale Francorum" -- witness this
especially in the ordination service; then the bishop prays that
"whatever they bind, shall be bound" etc. (Duchesne, Christian
Worship, 360, 361). The missionaries sent from Rome to England
in the seventh century did not establish a public form of
penance, but the affirmation of the priest's power is clear from
the "Poenitentiale Theodori", and from the legislation on the
Continent, which was enacted by the monks who came from England
and Ireland (Council of Reims, can. xxxi, Harduin). The false
decretals (about 850) accentuated the right of absolution; and
in a sermon of the same century, attributed perhaps wrongly to
St. Eligius, a fully developed doctrine is found. The Saint is
speaking of the reconciliation of penitents and warns them to be
sure of their dispositions, their sorrow, their purpose of
amendment; for "we are powerless," he says, "to grant pardon,
unless you put off the old man; but if by sincere repentance you
put off the old man with his works, then know that you are
reconciled to God by Christ, yea and by us, to whom He gave the
ministry of reconciliation." And this ministry of reconciliation
which he claims for the priesthood is that ministry and that
power granted to the Apostles by Christ when He said,
"Whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound in heaven" (P.
L., LXXXVII, 609, 610). The theologians of the medieval period,
from Alcuin to St. Bernard, insist that the right to absolve
from sin was given to the bishops and priests who succeeded to
the apostolic office (Alcuin, P. L., CI, 652-656; Benedict
Levita, P. L., C, 357; Jonas of Orleans, P. L., CVI, 152;
Pseudo-Egbert, P. L., LXXXIX, 415; Haymo of Halberstadt, P. L.,
CXVIII, 762 sqq.). Following the theologians, the canonists,
such as Regino of Pruem, Burchard of Worms, Ivo of Chartres,
furnish us with fuller proofs of the same power, and Harduin
(Councils, VI, i, 544) cites the fifteenth canon of the Council
of Trosle (909), which states expressly that penance through the
ministry of Christ's priests is "fruitful unto the remission of
sins". This epoch closes with St. Bernard, who takes Peter
Abelard to task for daring to assert that Christ gave the power
to forgive sins only to His disciples, and consequently that the
successors of the Apostles do not enjoy the same privileges (P.
L., CLXXXII, 1054). But while Bernard insists that the power of
the keys given to the Apostles is lodged in the bishop and in
the priests, he with equal stress insists that such power be not
exercised unless the penitent make a full confession of wrong
committed (ibid., 938). When the great scholastic epoch began,
the doctrine which obtained was a power to absolve sins and this
power distinctly recognized, in virtue of the power granted by
Christ to His Apostles. On the part of the penitent, sorrow and
a promise of better life were necessary, and also a declaration
of sin made to him whom Christ had appointed judge.
SCHOLASTIC AGE
At the beginning of the scholastic age, special stress is laid
upon the power of contrition to secure pardon. St. Anselm of
Canterbury, in a commentary upon Luke xvii, 14, likens this
power to that possessed of old by the Jewish priest in the case
of leprosy (P. L., CLVIII, 662; ibid., 361-430). At first sight,
the doctrine of St. Anselm seemed to annul the power to absolve
which antiquity had granted to the priesthood, and to reduce the
office of reconciliation to a mere declaration that sin had been
forgiven. Hugo of St. Victor (1097-1141) took ground against
Anselm, not because Anselm insisted on contrition, but because
he seemingly left no place for the power of the keys. But how
admit the one and not the other? Hugo says the sinner is "bound
down by obduracy of soul, and by the penalty of future
damnation"; the grace of God frees man from the darkness brought
on by sin, while the absolution of the priest delivers him from
the penalty which sin imposes -- "The malice of sin is best
described as obduracy of heart, which is first broken by sorrow,
that later, in confession, the sin itself, i.e. the penalty of
damnation, be remitted." There is some obscurity in the text,
but Hugo seems inclined to hold that the priest absolves from
the punishment due to sin, rather than from sin itself. The
Master of the Sentences, Peter Lombard, took issue with Hugo,
and asserted in clear terms that charity not only blotted out
the stain of sin, but also freed the sinner from punishment due
to sin. Not understanding, however, that penance as a sacrament
is a moral unit, Peter Lombard in turn used language which is
far from exact. He seems to hold that contrition takes away sin
and its consequences, and when questioned concerning the power
granted to the priest, he seems to recur to the opinion of
Anselm that it is declarative. "They remit or retain sins when
they judge and declare them remitted or retained by God" (P. L.,
CXCII, 888). He also grants to the priest certain power in
reference to the temporal punishment due to sin (ibid.). Richard
of St. Victor, though he speaks of the opinion of Peter Lombard
as frivolous, in reality differs but little from the Master of
the Sentences. Peter's opinion indeed exercised great influence
over the minds both of his contemporaries and of the following
generation. With William of Auvergne (who taught up to 1228,
when he became Archbishop of Paris) comes the distinction
between contrition and attrition in the Sacrament of Penance.
Contrition takes away all stain of guilt, while attrition
prepares the way for the real remission of sin in the sacrament.
Theologians had recognized the distinction between contrition
and attrition even before William of Paris, but neither
Alexander of Hales nor Albert, the master of Aquinas, advanced
much beyond the teaching of Peter Lombard. Both seemingly
insisted on real contrition before absolution, and both also
held that such contrition in reality took away mortal sin. They
did not, however, deny the office of the minister, for they both
held that contrition involved a promise of confession [Alb.
Mag., IV Sent., Dist. xvi-xvii (Paris, 1894), XXIX, 559, 660,
666, 670, 700]. St. Bonaventure (IV, Dist. xvii) also admits the
distinction between contrition and attrition; he asserts the
power of contrition to take away all sin, even without the
priest's absolution, confession being necessary only when
possible. As regards the priest's power to pardon sin, he not
only admits it, not only asserts that absolution forgives sin
and its eternal consequences, but calls it the forma sacramenti.
He even goes so far as to say that attrition is sufficient for
pardon if accompanied by absolution (ibid., Dist. xviii). When
questioned as to the manner in which absolution produces its
sacramental effect, he distinguishes between two forms of
absolution employed by the priest: the one deprecatory,
"Misereatur tui" etc., and the other indicative, "Ego te
absolvo". In the former the priest intercedes for the sinner,
and this intercession changes his attrition into real contrition
and secures pardon for sin committed. In the latter, which is
indicative and personal, the priest exercises the power of the
keys, but remits only a temporal punishment due still on account
of sin. This after all is but a new way of putting the theory of
Peter Lombard (ibid., Dist. xviii). St. Thomas Aquinas treats
this subject in his Commentary on the Master of the Sentences
(IV, Dist. xvii, xviii, xix; Summa Theologica III, QQ.
lxxxiv-xc; Supplement, QQ. i-xx; Opuscula, Do Forma
Absolutionis). Taking the many distracted theories of the
schoolmen with this partial truth, he fused them into a united
whole. In the commentary on the "Libri Sententiarum" he shows
clearly that the ministry of the priest is directly instrumental
in the forgiveness of sin; for "if the keys had not been
ordained for the remission of sin, but only for release from the
penalty (which was the opinion of the elder scholastics), there
would be no need of the intention to obtain the effect of the
keys for the remission of sin"; and in the same place he clearly
states: "Hence if before absolution one had not been perfectly
disposed to receive grace, one would receive it in sacramental
confession and absolution, if no obstacle be put in the way"
(Dist. xvii, 2, I, art. 3, Quaestiuncula iv). He sees clearly
that God alone can pardon sin, but God uses the instrumentality
of absolution which, with confession, contrition, and
satisfaction, concurs in obtaining forgiveness, in blotting out
the stain, in opening the kingdom of heaven, by cancelling the
sentence of eternal punishment. This doctrine is expressed again
with equal clearness in the "Summa" and in the "Supplement". In
the "Summa", Q. lxxxiv, art. 3, he states that the absolution of
the priest is the forma sacramenti, and consequently confession,
contrition, and satisfaction must constitute "in some way, the
matter of the sacrament". When asked whether perfect contrition
secured pardon for sin even outside the Sacrament of Penance,
St. Thomas answers in the affirmative; but then contrition is no
longer an integral part of the sacrament; it secures pardon
because forgiveness comes from perfect charity, independently of
the instrumentality of the sacramental rite (Supplement, Q. v,
a. 1). Duns Scotus not only grants the power of a solution in
the forgiveness of sin, but goes a step farther and asserts that
the sacrament consists principally in the absolution of the
priest, because confession, contrition, and satisfaction are not
integral parts or units in the sacrament, but only necessary
previous dispositions to the reception of divine grace and
forgiveness. "There is no similarity, therefore, between the
priest of the Law in regard to leprosy and the priest of the
Gospel in regard to sin", and he adds that the priest of the New
Law, "exercet actum qui est signum prognosticum, efficax
mundationis sequentis" etc. (edit. Vives, XVIII, 649, 650, in
Dist. XIX; ibid., 420, 421). Some think this opinion of Scotus
more in conformity with the Council of Treat, which calls
contrition, confession, and satisfaction not "the matter", but
quasi materia, "as if the matter", of the sacrament; others
doubt whether the Council thus meant to class contrition,
confession, and satisfaction as mere necessary dispositions.
This doctrine, as taught by St. Thomas and Scotus finds its echo
in the Council of Florence, in the decree of Eugene IV, as it
does in the Council of Trent, which defines (Sess. XIV, chap.
iii), "That the form of the Sacrament of Penance, wherein its
force principally consists, is placed in those words of the
priest: 'I absolve thee' etc., but the acts of the penitent
himself are quasi materia of this Sacrament."
MINISTER
In the closing years of the first century, Ignatius of Antioch
asserts that Penance is in the hands of the bishop; soon the
same power is recognized in the priests, and in St. Cyprian, the
deacon on extraordinary occasions performed the office of
reconciliation (Batiffol, Theol. pos., 145 sqq.). The deacon's
power is recognized later on in Alcuin, in a council held at
York, 1194, and in the Council of London, 1200 (cap. iii).
TIME
The ceremonial rite connected with the sacrament of
reconciliation has also varied with the changing discipline of
the Church. The earliest tradition hints at a public penance --
vide tradition supra -- but very soon there appears the
Presbyter Poenitentiarius; certainly as early as 309 Pope
Marcellus divided Rome into twenty-five districts propter
baptismum et poenitentiam, and Innocent I (416) mentions the
"priest whose office it was to judge anent sin, to receive the
confession of the penitent, to watch over his satisfaction, and
to present him for reconciliation at the proper time". The case
of Nectarius who abolished the Presbyter Poenitentiarius is
classical (381-98). This reconciliation generally took place on
Holy Thursday, and the bishop presided. Surely absolution was
pronounced on Maundy Thursday. This all the sacramentaries
attest (Duchesne, Christian Worship, 439, 440); but the practice
of public penance has given rise to the important and difficult
question, whether or not the absolution granted at the public
function of Holy Thursday was really the sacramental absolution.
Theologians have questioned this, many preferring to believe
that the sacramental absolution was really imparted by the
Presbyter Poenitentiarius at the early stage of public penance,
even before the satisfaction was complete. They allege as their
reasons the long delay which otherwise would have been necessary
and the fact that the bishop absolved on Holy Thursday, while
the confession had been heard previously by the Presbyter
Poenitentiarius (Palmieri, De poenit., App. II, nn. 8, 9). But
there are many others who think the traditional truth concerning
the Sacrament of Penance cannot be safeguarded unless it is
admitted that, ordinarily speaking, sacramental absolution was
given only after the completion of the penance imposed and in
the public session of Holy Thursday. What was done, they ask,
before the institution of the Presbyter Poenitentiarius, or
where there was no such functionary? And they answer the
objections brought forward above by saying that there is no
evidence in early history that a first absolution was imparted
by the priests who determined the necessity of undergoing public
satisfaction, nor are we permitted a priori to judge of ancient
ways in the light of our modern practice (Boudinhon, Revue
d'histoire de litterature relig., II, sec. iii, 329, 330, etc.;
Batiffol, Theolog. posit., Les origines de la penitence, IV, 145
sqq.). Moreover, there is full evidence of a reconciliation on
Holy Thursday; there are canons as late as the sixth century
forbidding priests to reconcile penitents, inconsulto episcopo
(Batiffol, ibid. 192, 193), and even as late as the ninth
century there is clear testimony that absolution was not given
until after the imposed penance had been completed (Benedict
Levita, P. L., XCVII, 715; Rabanus Maurus, P. L., CVII, 342;
Harduin, Councils, V, 342); and when absolution was granted
before Holy Thursday it was after the fashion of an exception
(Pseudo Alcuin, CI, 1192): "Denique admonendi sunt ut ad coenam
Domini redeant ad reconciliationem: si vero interest causa
itineris . . . reconciliet eum statim" etc. This exception
gradually became the rule, especially after the Scholastics of
the Middle Age period began to distinguish clearly the different
parts which make up the Sacrament of Penance.
FORM
It is the teaching of the Council of Treat that the form of the
Sacrament of Penance, wherein its force principally consists, is
placed in these words of the minister, "I absolve thee"; to
which words certain prayers are, according to the custom of Holy
Church, laudably added etc. (Sess. XIV, iii). That the public
penance was concluded with some sort of prayer for pardon, is
the doctrine of antiquity, particularly as contained in the
earliest sacramentaries (Duchesne, Christian Worship, 440, 441).
Leo the Great (450) does not hesitate to assert that pardon is
impossible without the prayer of the priest ("ut indulgentia
nisi supplicationibus sacerdotum nequeat obtineri"). In the
early Church these forms certainly varied (Duchesne, loc. cit.).
Surely all the sacramentaries assert that the form was
deprecatory, and it is only in the eleventh century that we find
a tendency to pass to indicative and personal formulae
(Duchesne, loc. cit.). Some of the forms used at the transition
period are interesting: "May God absolve thee from all thy sins,
and through the penance imposed mayst thou be absolved by the
Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, by the Angels, by the Saints,
and by me, a wretched sinner" (Garofali, Ordo ad dandam
poenitentiam, 15). Then come really indicative and personal
formulae, often preceded by the supplicatory prayer, "Misereatur
tui" etc. These forms, while much the same in substance, vary in
wording not a little (Vacant, Dict. de theol. 167). It was not
until the scholastic doctrine of "matter and form" in the
sacraments reached its full development that the formula of
absolution became fixed as we have it at present. The form in
use in the Roman Church to-day has not changed since long before
the Council of Florence. It is divided into four parts as
follows: --
+ (1) Deprecatory prayer. "May the Almighty God have mercy on
you, and forgiving your sins, bring you to life everlasting.
Amen." Thea, lifting his right hand towards the penitent, the
priest continues: "May the Almighty and Merciful God grant you
pardon, absolution, and remission of your sins".
+ (2) "May Our Lord Jesus Christ absolve you, and I, by His
authority, absolve you from every bond of excommunication
[suspension, in the case of a cleric only] and interdict as
far as I can and you may need."
+ (3) "I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." (While repeating
the names of the Trinity, the priest makes the sign of the
cross over the penitent.)
+ (4) "May the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the merits of
the Blessed Virgin Mary and of all the Saints, what good you
have done or what evil you have suffered be to you for the
remission of (your) sins, growth in grace and the reward of
everlasting life. Amen." In the decree "Pro Armenis", 1439,
Eugene IV teaches that the "form" of the Sacrament is really
in those words of the priest: "Ego absolvo te a peccatis tuis
in nomine Patris" etc., and theologians teach that absolution
would be valid should the priest use, "Absolvo te", "Absolvo
to a peccatis tuis", or words that are the exact equivalent
(Suarez, Disp., XIX, i, n. 24; Lugo, Disp., XIII, i, nn. 17,
18; Lehmkuhl, de Poenit., 9th ed., 199).
In the Oriental churches the present forms are deprecatory,
though they by no means exclude the idea of a judicial
pronouncement on the part of the minister. Such are the forms of
absolution among
(a) Greeks,
(b) Russians,
(c) Syrians,
(d) Armenians,
(e) Copts.
Is the indicative form necessary? Many learned Catholics seem to
hold that the indicative form as used at present in the Roman
Church is necessary even for the validity of the Sacrament of
Penance. The great Doctor of the Sacrament, St. Alphonsus (De
Sac. Poenit., n. 430), declares that no matter what may be the
verdict from the point of view of history, it is of faith since
the Council of Treat that the indicative form is essential. St.
Thomas and Suarez also declare that the indicative form is
necessary. Others equally learned, and perhaps better versed in
history, hold that in the light of the Divine institution the
deprecative form must not be excluded, and that the Council of
Trent in its decree did not intend to make final pronouncement
in the premises. They point out with Morinus (De Poenit., Lib.
VIII) that up to the twelfth century the deprecatory form was
employed both in the East and in the West: that it is still in
use among the Greeks and among Orientals generally. In the
light, therefore, of history and of theological opinion it is
perfectly safe to conclude that the deprecatory form is
certainly not invalid, if it exclude not the idea of judicial
pronouncement (Palmieri, Parergon, 127; Hurter, de Poenit.;
Duchesne, loc. cit.; Soto, Vasquez, Estius, et al.).
Theologians, however, have questioned whether or not the
deprecatory form would be valid to-day in the Latin Church, and
they point out that Clement VIII and Benedict XIV have
prescribed that Greek priests should use the indicative form
whensoever they absolve penitents belonging to the Latin Rite.
But this is merely a matter of discipline, and such decrees do
not give final decision to the theological question, for in
matters of administration of the Sacraments those in authority
simply follow the safest and most conservative opinions. Morinus
is followed by Tournely in asserting that only the indicative
form is to-day valid in the Latin Church (Morinus, De poenit.,
Lib. VIII; Tournely, ibid., do absolutionis forma); but many
hold that if the deprecatory form exclude not the judicial
pronouncement of the priest, and consequently be really
equivalent to the ego te absolvo, it is surely not invalid,
though all are agreed that it would be illicit as contravening
the present law and discipline of the Roman Church. Some, not
pronouncing judgment on the real merits of the case, think that
the Holy See has withdrawn faculties from those who do not use
the indicative form, but in the absence of positive ordinance
this is by no means certain.
CONDITIONAL ABSOLUTION
Antiquity makes no mention of conditional absolution. Benedict
XIV alludes in "De Synodo" (Bk. VII, c. xv) to a passage of
Gandavensis (d. 1293), but it is doubtful whether the learned
pontiff caught the meaning of the theologian of Ghent. Gerson in
the fifteenth century, both in "De schismate tollendo" and "De
unitate ecclesiae", stands as sponsor for conditional
absolution, although Cajetan, a century later, calls Gerson's
position mere superstition. But Gerson's position gradually
obtained, and in our day all theologians grant that under
certain circumstances such absolution is not only valid but also
legitimate (Lehmkuhl-Gury, De poenit., absol. sub conditione);
valid, because judicial pronouncements are often rendered under
certain conditions, and the Sacrament of Penance is essentially
a judicial act (Counc. of Trent, Sees. XIV); also, because God
absolves in heaven when certain conditions are fulfilled here
below. The fulfilment may escape man's judgment, but God no man
may deceive. This very doubt makes conditional absolution
possible. Conditions are either
(a) present,
(b) past, or
(c) future.
Following a general law, whensoever the condition leaves in
suspense the effect intended by the Sacrament, the Sacrament
itself is null and void. If the condition does not suspend the
sacramental efficacy, the Sacrament may be valid. As a
consequence, all future conditions render absolution invalid: "I
absolve you if you die to-day." This is not true of conditions
past or present, and absolution given, for example, on condition
that the subject has been baptized, or is still alive, would
certainly not invalidate the Sacrament. What is in itself valid
may not be legitimate, and in this important matter reverence
due the holy Sacrament must ever be kept in mind, and also the
spiritual need of the penitent. The doctrine commonly received
is that whenever conditional absolution will safeguard the
holiness and dignity of the Sacrament it may be employed, or
whenever the spiritual need of the penitent is clear, but at the
same time dispositions necessary for the valid reception of the
Sacrament are in doubt, then it would be a mercy to impart
absolution even if under condition.
INDIRECT ABSOLUTION
Closely allied to conditional is the absolution termed indirect.
It obtains whenever absolution is granted for a fault that has
not been submitted to the judgment of the minister in the
tribunal of penance. Forgetfulness on the part of the penitent
is responsible for most cases of indirect absolution, though
sometimes reservation (see RESERVED CASES) may be.
GRANTING OF ABSOLUTION
In virtue of Christ's dispensation, the bishops and priests are
made judges in the Sacrament of Penance. The power to bind as
well as the power to loose has been given by Christ. The
minister therefore must have in mind not only his own powers,
viz., order and jurisdiction, but he must also keep in mind the
dispositions of the penitent. If
+ (a) the penitent is well-disposed, he must absolve;
+ (b) if the penitent lack the requisite dispositions, he must
endeavour to create the proper frame of mind, for he cannot
and may not absolve one indisposed;
+ (c) when dispositions remain doubtful, he employs the
privilege given above in conditional absolution.
When the minister sees fit to grant absolution, then he
pronounces the words of the form ( supra) over the penitent. It
is commonly taught that the penitent must be physically present;
consequently, absolution by telegraph has been declared invalid,
and when questioned in regard to absolution by the telephone the
Sacred Congregation (1 July, 1884) answered Nihil respondendum.
ABSOLUTION OUTSIDE THE LATIN CHURCH
(I) In the Greek Church
The belief of the ancient Greek Church has been set forth above.
That the Greeks have always believed that the Church has power
to forgive sin, that they believe it at present, is clear from
the formulae of absolution in vogue among all branches of the
Church; also from the decrees of synods which since the
Reformation have again and again expressed this belief (Alzog on
Cyril Lucaris III, 465; Synod of Constantinople, 1638; Synod of
Jassy, 1642; Synod of Jerusalem, 1672). In the Synod of
Jerusalem the Church reiterates its belief in Seven Sacraments,
among them Penance, which the Lord established when He said:
"Whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them, and whose
sins you shall retain they are retained." The formulae of
absolution are generally deprecatory, and if now and then the
indicative form appears, it may be traced to Latin sources.
(II) Russian Church
The belief of the Greek Church is naturally also that of the
Russian. Russian theologians all hold that the Church possesses
the power to forgive sins, where there is true repentance and
sincere confession. The form in use at present is as follows:
"My child, N. N., may our Lord and God Christ Jesus by the mercy
of His love absolve thee from thy sins; and I, His unworthy
priest, in virtue of the authority committed to me, absolve thee
and declare thee absolved of thy sins in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen."
(III) Armenians
Denzinger, in his "Ritus Orientalium "(1863), gives us a full
translation of the penitential ritual used by the Armenians. The
present version is from the ninth century. The form of
absolution is declarative, though it is preceded by a prayer for
mercy and for pardon. It is as follows: "May the merciful Lord
have pity on thee and forgive thee thy faults; in virtue of my
priestly power, by the authority and command of God expressed in
these words, 'whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be hound
in heaven', I absolve thee from thy sins, I absolve thee from
thy thoughts, from thy words, from thy deeds, in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and I restore
thee to the Sacrament of the Holy Church. May all thy good works
be for thee an increase of merit, may they be for the glory of
life everlasting, Amen."
(IV) Copts
Dr. Hyvernat asserts that the liturgical books of the Copts have
no penitential formulae, nor is this surprising, for they
inscribe in the ritual only those things not found in other
rituals. Father du Bernat, writing to Pere Fleurian (Lettres
edifiantes), says, in reference to the Sacrament of Penance
among the Copts, that the Copts believe themselves bound to a
full confession of their sins. This finished, the priest recites
over them the prayer said at the beginning of the Mass, the
prayer asking pardon and forgiveness from God; to this is added
the so-called "Benediction", which Father Bernat says is like
the prayer said in the Latin Church after absolution has been
imparted. Dr. Hyvernat, however, asserts that Father Bernat is
mistaken when he likens the Benediction to our Passio Domini,
for it is like the Latin prayer only inasmuch as it is recited
after absolution.
(V) Jacobites
(For the earliest tradition in the Syrian Church see above,
Absolution in Patristic age.)
The Syrians who are united with the Roman See now use the
declarative form in imparting absolution. This formula is,
however, of recent date. The present Jacobite Church not only
holds and has held the power to absolve from sin, but its ritual
is expressive of this same power. Denzinger (Ritus Orientalium)
has preserved for us a twelfth-century document which gives in
full the order of absolution.
(VI) Nestorians
The Nestorians have at all times believed in the power to
absolve in the Sacrament of Penance. Assemani, Renaudot, Badger
(Nestorians and their Rituals), also Denzinger, have the fullest
information on this point. It is noticeable that their formula
of absolution is deprecatory, not indicative.
(VII) Protestants
The earliest Reformers attacked virulently the penitential
practice of the Catholic Church, particularly the confession of
sins to a priest. Their opinions expressed in their later
theological works do not differ as markedly from the old
position as one might suppose. The Lutheran tenet of
justification by faith alone would make all absolution merely
declarative, and reduce the pardon granted by the Church to the
merest announcement of the Gospel, especially of remission of
sins through Christ. Zwingli held that God alone pardoned sin,
and he saw nothing but idolatry in the practice of hoping for
pardon from a mere creature. If confession had aught of good it
was merely as direction. Calvin denied all idea of sacrament
when there was question of Penance; but he held that the pardon
expressed by the minister of the Church gave to the penitent a
greater guarantee of forgiveness. The Confession styled
"Helvetian" contents itself with denying the necessity of
confession to a priest, but holds that the power granted by
Christ to absolve is simply the power to preach to the people
the Gospel of Jesus, and as a consequence the remission of sins:
"Rite itaque et efficaciter ministri absolvunt dum evangelium
Christi et in hoc remissionem peccatorum praedicant."
(VIII) Anglican Church
In the "Book of Common Prayer" there is a formula of Absolution
in Matins, at the communion service, and in the visitation of
the sick. The first two are general, akin to the liturgical
absolution in use in the Roman Church; the third is individual
by the very nature of the case. Of the third absolution the
rubric speaks as follows: "Here shall the sick person be moved
to make a special confession of his sins if he feel his
conscience troubled with any weighty matter. After which
confession, the priest shall absolve him (if he humbly and
heartily desire it) after this sort: Our Lord Jesus Christ, who
hath left power to His Church to absolve all sinners who truly
repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy forgive thee thine
offences and by His authority committed to me, I absolve thee
from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." This is the form generally
employed by the Anglican clergymen when they absolve after
having heard private confessions. These formulae, even the last,
are indeed vague, and in the light of Anglican interpretation
(always excepting the advanced Ritualists) mean little more than
the power to declare sins forgiven. (Convocation, 1873; Lambeth
Conference, 1877; Liddon's "Life of Pusey").
The Ritualists, since the Pusey sermon of 1846, have held with
more or less variance that Christ has granted to His priests the
power to forgive sins. They have also held that this power
should be exercised after confession has been made to the
minister of the Church. Among Ritualists themselves some have
insisted that confession to the priest was necessary either in
re or in voto, others have not gone to such lengths. On the
discussion in the year 1898, Dr. Temple wrote a Pastoral. One
may consult with profit Mashell's "Enquiry upon the Doctrine of
the Anglican Church on Absolution"; Boyd's "Confession,
Absolution and Real Presence"; Father Gallwey's "Twelve Lectures
on Ritualism" (London, 1879).
EDWARD J. HANNA.
Abstemii
Abstemii
An abstemius is one who cannot take wine without risk of
vomiting. As, therefore, the consecration at Mass must be
effected in both species, of bread and wine, an abstemius is
consequently irregular. St. Alphonsus, following the opinion of
Suarez, teaches that such irregularity is de jure divino; and
that, therefore, the Pope cannot dispense from it. The term is
also applied to one who has a strong distaste for wine, though
able to take a small quantity. A distaste of this nature does
not constitute irregularity, but a papal dispensation is
required, in order to excuse from the use of wine at the
purification of the chalice and the ablution of the priest's
fingers at the end of Mass. In these cases the use of wine is an
ecclesiastical law from whose observance the Church has power to
dispense. A decree of Propaganda, dated 13 January, 1665, grants
a dispensation in this sense to missionaries in China, on
account of the scarcity of wine; various similar rulings are to
be found in the collection of the decrees of the Congregation of
Rites. Abstention from the use of wine has, occasionally, been
declared obligatory by heretics. It was one of the tenets of
Gnosticism in the second century. Tatian, the founder of the
sect known as the Encratites, forbade the use of wine, and his
adherents refused to make use of it even in the Sacrament of the
Altar; in its place they used water. These heretics, mentioned
by St. Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., I, xxx), are known as
Hydroparastes, Aquarians, and Encratites. The great Manichean
heresy followed a few years later. These heretics, in their
turn, professed the greatest possible aversion to wine, as one
of the sources of sin. St. Augustine, in his book against
heresies, ch. xlvi, says of them, "Vinum non bibunt, dicentes
esse fel principum tenebrarum" -- " They drink no wine, for they
say it is the gall of the princes of darkness." They made use of
water in celebrating Mass. At the beginning of the Reformation,
one of the grievances alleged against the Church was that she
did not allow the faithful to communicate under both kinds. "We
excuse the Church", so runs the Augsburg Confession, "which has
suffered the injustice of only receiving under one kind, not
being able to have both; but we do not excuse the authors of
this injustice, who maintain that it was right to forbid the
administering of the complete Sacrament." How, then, were those
to be admitted to the Lord's Table, who were unable to
communicate under the species of wine? A decree of the Synod of
Poitiers, in 1560, reads: "The Bread of the Lord's Supper shall
be administered to those who cannot drink the wine, on condition
that they shall declare that they do not abstain out of
contempt." Other Protestant synods also lay down the rule that
persons unable to take wine shall be admitted to the Lord's
Table on condition that they shall at least touch with their
lips the cup which holds the species of wine; Jurieu, on the
other hand, starting from the principle that Christ has founded
the essence of the Eucharist on the two species, held that an
abstemius does not receive the Sacrament, because it consists of
two parts, and he receives only one. A great controversy ensued
among the Protestants themselves on this point. Bossuet held
that communion under both kinds could not be of divine
obligation, since many would thereby be deprived of the
Sacrament owing to a natural weakness.
BENEDICTO OJECTI, Synopsis Rerum Moralium et Juris Pontificii
(1904); Theologia Moralis Sti. Alphonsi, Lib. VII, 409;
Collectanea S. Congregationis de Propaganda Fide, N. 798;
BOSSUET, La Tradition defendue sur la matiere de la communion
sous une espece, VI; JEROME in Dict. de theol. cath., s.v.;
Absteme; CORBLET, Hist. du Sacrement de l'Eucharistie (Paris,
1886).
JOS. N. GIGNAC
Abstinence
Abstinence
Inasmuch as abstinence signifies abstaining from food, the Bible
narrative points to the first instance wherein such a course of
conduct was imposed by law (Gen., ii, l6, 17). The obvious
purpose of this mandate was to lead the moral head of the human
race to recognize the necessary dependence of creature upon
Creator. The hour which witnessed the transgression of this law
marked an increase in the debt which the creature owed the
Creator. Adam's disobedience rendered all men criminal, and
liable to the necessity of appeasing God's justice. To meet this
new exigency nature dictated the necessity of penance; positive
legislation determined the ways and means whereby this natural
obligation would best be concreted. The chief results of this
determination are positive statutes concerning fasting and
abstinence. Laws relating to fasting are principally intended to
define what pertains to the quantity of food allowed on days of
fasting, while those regulating abstinence, what refers to the
quality of viands. In some instances both obligations coincide;
thus, the Fridays of Lent are days of fasting and abstinence. In
other instances the law of abstinence alone binds the faithful;
thus ordinary Fridays are simply days of abstinence. The purpose
of this article is to trace the history of ecclesiastical
legislation regarding the law of abstinence, as well as to
examine the motives which underlie this legislation.
THE BIBLE: ABSTINENCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
Fasting implying abstinence was ordained by law for the Day of
Atonement (Lev., xvi, 29 sq.). The ceremony incident to this
feast was observed by the Jews on the fifth day before the feast
of Tabernacles. >From evening of the ninth until evening of
the tenth day labour and eating were strictly prohibited.
Besides this passage the sacred narrative contains many others
which show how adversity moved the Jews to assume the burden of
fasting and abstinence in a spirit of penance (Judges, xx, 26;
Judith, vi, 20; Joel, l, 14; ii, 15). Moreover, the Jews
abstained on the ninth day of the fourth month, because on that
day Nabuchodonosor captured Jerusalem (Jer., lii, 6); on the
tenth day of the fifth month, because on that day the temple was
burned (Jer., lii, 12 sq.); on the third day of the seventh
month, because on that day Godolias had been murdered (Jer.,
xli, 2); and on the tenth day of the tenth month, because on
that day the Chaldees commenced the siege of Jerusalem (IV
Kings, xxv, 1 sq.). They were told that fidelity to these
regulations would bring joy, gladness, and great solemnities to
the house of Juda (Zach., viii, 19). During the month of new
corn they were obliged to spend seven days without leaven, and
to eat the bread of affliction in memory of their delivery from
Egypt (Deut., xvi, 3). In addition to those indications
concerning the seasons of abstinence amongst the Jews, the
sacred text contains passages regarding the ways and means
whereby the law of abstinence assumed more definite shape
amongst them. After the deluge God said to Noe: "Everything that
moveth upon the earth shall be a meat for you, saving that flesh
with blood you shall not eat" (Gen., ix, 3, 4; similar passages
are contained in Lev., vii, 26 sq.; xvii, 14 sq.; Deut., xii,
15,16). A prohibition whereby corn, oil, wine, and the
first-born of herds and cattle are forbidden in towns is set
forth in Deut., xii, 17. Priests were forbidden to drink any
intoxicant lest they die (Lev., x, 9). The eleventh chapter of
Leviticus contains a detailed enumeration of the various beasts,
birds, and fish that fall under the ban. Such were reputed
unclean. Abstinence from things legally unclean was intended to
train the Israelites in the pursuit of spiritual cleanness.
The Old Testament furnishes several instances of celebrated
personages who betook themselves to this chastisement of the
flesh. David kept fast on account of the child born of the wife
of Urias (II Kings, xii, 16); Esther humbled her body with fasts
(Esth., xiv, 2); Judith fasted all the days of her life (Jud.,
viii, 6); Daniel ate neither bread nor flesh till the days of
three weeks were accomplished (Dan., x, 3), and Judas Machabeus
and all the people craved mercy in tears and fasting (II Mach.,
xiii, 12). Moreover, Esdras commanded a fast by the river Ahava
(I Esd., viii, 21). The King of Ninive proclaimed a fast in
Ninive whereby neither man nor beasts should taste anything,
whether of food or drink (Jonas, iii, 7). Moses (Ex., xxxiv, 28)
and Elias (III Kings, xix, 8) spent forty days in abstinence and
fasting. Finally, the Pharisee in the Temple declared that he
fasted "twice in a week" (Luke, xviii, 12). Apropos of this
passage Duchesne says that Monday and Thursday were days of
fasting among the pious Jews ("Christian Worship", London, 1903,
228).
THE NEW TESTAMENT
In the first portion of his Gospel St. Matthew relates how
Christ passed forty days in the desert, during which time
neither food nor drink passed his lips. No doubt this penance of
the God-man was not only expiatory, but also exemplary. True,
Christ did not explicitly define the days nor the weeks wherein
his followers would be obliged to fast and abstain. At the same
time his example, coupled with his reply to the disciples of the
Baptist, is an evidence that the future would find his followers
subjected to regulations whereby they would fast "after the
bridegroom had been taken away". The only piece of clearly
defined legislation concerning abstinence embodied in the New
Testament was framed by the Council of Jerusalem, prescribing
"abstinence from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and
from things strangled" (Acts, xv, 29). Nevertheless the Acts of
the Apostles give evidence of a tendency on the part of the
Church, as an organized body, to prepare the way for important
events by abstinence and fasting (Acts, xiii, 3; xiv; 22). In
fine, St. Paul sets forth the necessity of abstinence when he
says that "everyone striving for the mastery must abstain from
all things (I Cor., ix, 25); and "let us exhibit ourselves as
the ministers of Christ in labours, watchings, and fastings "
(II Cor., vi, 5), which he had often practiced (II Cor., xi,
27).
THE LATIN CHURCH: SUBJECTS UNDER, AND MATERIAL ELEMENT OF, THE LAW
Throughout the Latin Church the law of abstinence prohibits all
responsible subjects from indulging in meat diet on duly
appointed days. Meat diet comprises the flesh, blood, or marrow
of such animals and birds as constitute flesh meat according to
the appreciation of intelligent and law-abiding Christians. For
this reason the use of fish, vegetables, mollusks, crabs,
turtles, frogs, and such-like cold-blooded creatures is not at
variance with the law of abstinence. Amphibians are relegated to
the category whereunto they bear most striking resemblance. This
classification can scarcely preclude all doubt regarding viands
prohibited by the law of abstinence. Local usage, together with
the practice of intelligent and conscientious Christians,
generally holds a key for the solution of mooted points in such
matters, otherwise the decision rests with ecclesiastical
authority. Furthermore, on many fasting days during the year the
law of abstinence bars the use of such viands as bear some
identity of origin with flesh meat. For this reason eggs, milk,
butter, cheese, and lard are interdicted (St. Thomas, Summa,
II-II, Q. cvii, art. ult., ad 3). The Church enjoins the ways
and means whereby her subjects must satisfy the obligation of
doing penance inculcated by natural law. Many of the Fathers
allude to the exercise of ecclesiastical authority in reference
to the obligation of abstinence. The disciplinary canons of
various councils bear witness to the actual exercise of
authority in the same direction. Texts of theology and
catechisms of Christian doctrine indicate that the obligation of
abstaining forms an element in one of the Commandments of the
Church. Satisfaction for sin is an item of primary import in the
moral order. Naturally enough, abstinence contributes no small
share towards the realization of this end. As a consequence, the
law of abstinence embodies a serious obligation whose
transgression, objectively considered, ordinarily involves a
mortal sin. The unanimous verdict of theologians, the constant
practice of the faithful, and the mind of the Church place this
point beyond cavil. They who would fain minimize the character
of this obligation so as to relegate all transgressions, save
such as originate in contempt, to the category of venial sin are
anathematized by Alexander VII [Cf. Prop. 23, ap. Bucceroni,
Enchiridion Morale, 145 (Rome, 1905)]. In fine, the Trullan
synod (can. 58, ap. Hefele, "History of the Councils of the
Church", V, 231, Edinburgh, 1896) inflicts deposition on clerics
and excommunication on laymen who violate this law. Furthermore,
theologians claim that a grievous sin is committed as often as
flesh meat is consumed in any quantity on abstinence days
(Sporer, Theologia Moralis super Decalogum, I, De observ.
jejunii, # 2, assert. II), because the law is negative, and
binds semper et pro semper. In other words, the prohibition of
the Church in this matter is absolute. At times, however, the
quantity of prohibited material may be so small that the law
suffers no substantial violation. From an objective standpoint
such transgressions carry the guilt of venial sin. Moralists are
by no means unanimous in deciding where the material element of
such minor disorders passes into a material disorder of major
importance. Some think that an ounce of flesh meat suffices to
constitute a serious breach of this law, whereas others claim
that nothing short of two ounces involves infringement of this
obligation. Ordinarily, the actual observance of the law is
confined to such circumstances as carry no insupportable burden.
This is why the sick, the infirm, mendicants, labourers, and
such as find difficulty in procuring fish diet are not bound to
observe the law as long as such conditions prevail.
DAYS OF ABSTINENCE
(1) Friday
From the dawn of Christianity, Friday has been signalized as an
abstinence day, in order to do homage to the memory of Christ
suffering and dying on that day of the week. The "Teaching of
the Apostles" (viii), Clement of Alexandria (Strom., VI, 75),
and Tertullian (De jejun., xiv) make explicit mention of this
practice. Pope Nicholas I (858-867) declares that abstinence
from flesh meat is enjoined on Fridays. There is every reason to
conjecture that Innocent III (1198-1216) had the existence of
this law in mind when he said that this obligation is suppressed
as often as Christmas Day falls on Friday (De observ. jejunii,
ult. cap. Ap. Layman, Theologia Moralis, I, iv, tract. viii,
ii). Moreover, the way in which the custom of abstaining on
Saturday originated in the Roman Church is a striking evidence
of the early institution of Friday as an abstinence day.
(2) Saturday
As early as the time of Tertullian, some churches occasionally
prolonged the Friday abstinence and fast so as to embrace
Saturday. Tertullian (De jejunio, xiv) calls this practice
continuare jejunium -- an expression subsequently superseded by
superponere jejunium. Such prolongations were quite common at
the end of the third century. The Council of Elvira (can. xxvi,
ap. Hefele, op. cit., I, 147) enjoins the observance of one such
fast and abstinence every month, except during July and August.
At the same time the fathers of Elvira abrogated the
"superposition" which had up to that time been obligatory on all
Saturdays (Duchesne, op. cit., 231). Moreover, Gregory VII
(1073-85) speaks in no uncertain terms of the obligation to
abstain on Saturdays, when he declares that all Christians are
bound to abstain from flesh meat on Saturday as often as no
major solemnity (e. g. Christmas) occurs on Saturday, or no
infirmity serves to cancel the obligation (cap. Quia dies, d. 5,
de consecrat., ap. Joannes, Azor. Inst. Moral. I, Bk. VII, c.
xii). Various authors have assigned different reasons to account
for the extension of the obligation so as to bind the faithful
to abstain not only on Fridays, but also on Saturdays. Some hold
that this practice was inaugurated to commemorate the burial of
Christ Jesus; others that it was instituted to imitate the
Apostles and Disciples of Christ, who, together with the Holy
Women, mourned the death of Christ even on the seventh day;
while others claim that it owes its origin to the conduct of St.
Peter, who passed Saturday in prayer, abstinence, and fasting,
to prepare to meet Simon Magus on the following day (Acts, viii,
18 sq.; cf. Migne, P. L. XLIX, coll. 147, 148). Though the Roman
Pontiffs have constantly refused to abrogate the law of
abstaining on Saturday, special indults dispensing with the
obligation have been granted to the faithful in many parts of
the world.
(3) Lent
In point of duration, as well as in point of penitential
practices, Lent has been the subject of many vicissitudes. In
the days of St. Irenaeus (177-202) the season of penance
preceding Easter was of rather short duration. Some fasted and
therefore abstained from flesh meat etc. for one day, others for
two days, and others again for a greater number of days. No
distinct traces of the quadragesimal observance are discernible
until the fourth century. The decrees of the Council of Nicaea
in 325 (can. v, ap. Hefele, op. cit., I, 387) contain the
earliest mention of Lent. Thenceforward ecclesiastical history
contains numerous allusions to those forty days. Nevertheless,
the earliest references to the quadragesimal season indicate
that it was then usually considered a time of preparation for
baptism, or for the absolution of penitents, or a season of
retreat and recollection for people living in the world. True,
fasting and abstinence formed part of the duties characterizing
this season, but there was little or no uniformity in the manner
of observance. On the contrary, different countries adopted a
different regime. At Rome it was customary to spend but three
weeks, immediately before Easter, in abstinence, fasting, and
praying (Socrates, H. E., V, 22). Many attempts were made to
include Holy Week in Quadragesima. The attempt succeeded at
Rome, so that thenceforward the Lenten season consisted of six
weeks. During these six weeks Sundays were the only days not
reached by the law of fasting, but the obligation to abstain was
not withdrawn from Sundays. As a consequence, the Lenten season
numbered no more than thirty-six days. Hence St. Ambrose (Serm.
xxxiv, de Quadrag.) notes that the beginning of Lent and the
first Sunday of Lent were simultaneous prior to the reign of
Gregory I. In the seventh century four days were added. Some
claim that this change was the work of Gregory I; others ascribe
it to Gregory II (Layman, loc. cit.). Duchesne (op. cit., 244)
says that it is impossible to tell who added four days to the
thirty-six previously comprised in the Lenten season. It is
likely, at all events, that the change was made so as to have
forty days in which to commemorate Christ's forty days in the
desert. Be this as it may, the Church has never deviated from
the ordinance of the seventh century whereby the Lenten season
comprises forty days over and above Sundays.
(4) Ember Days
The beginning of the four seasons of the year is marked by Ember
Week, during which Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday are days of
fasting and abstinence. Ember Week occurs after the first Sunday
of Lent, after Pentecost, after the feast of the Exaltation of
the Holy Cross, and after the third Sunday in Advent. According
to some writers the Ember Days in December were introduced by
the Apostles as a preparation for the ordinations which occurred
during that month (Layman, loc. cit.). The scriptural basis for
this practice is to be found in Acts, xiii, 2 sq. The summer
Ember Days were observed during the octave of Pentecost (St. Leo
I, Sermo ii, de Pentecost.), and the autumn Ember Days in
September (Idem, Sermo viii, De jejunio septimi mensis). In the
False Decretals (c. 840-50) Pope Callistus (217-22) is made to
add a fourth week. We decree, he says, that the fast which you
have learned to keep three times yearly, shall henceforward be
made four times a year (Epist., Decr. lxxvi, cap., i; Migne, P.
G., X, 121). St. Jerome, in his commentary on the eighth chapter
of Zachary, believes that the Ember Days were instituted after
the example of the Jews, who fasted and abstained four times
during the year, as noted in the preceding paragraph. St. Leo I
(Sermo vii, De jej. sept. mensis) considers that the purpose of
penance during Ember Week is to urge the faithful to special
efforts in the cause of continency. The two views are entirely
compatible.
(5) Advent
Radulphus de Rivo (Kalendarium eccles. seu de observations
canonum, Prop. xvi) and Innocent III (De observ. jej., cap. ii)
testify that the Roman Church appointed a period of fasting and
abstinence as a preparation for the solemnization of Christmas.
Traces of this custom are still to be found in the Roman
Breviary indicating the recitation of ferial prayers during
Advent just as on days of fasting and abstinence. Radulphus de
Rivo (loc. cit.) remarks that the Roman Church appointed the
first Sunday after St. Catharine's feast as the beginning of
Advent.
6. Vigils
In former times the clergy assembled in church, on the eves of
great festivals, and chanted the divine office. In like manner
the laity also repaired to their churches and passed the time in
watching and praying. Hence the term vigil. Innocent III (op.
cit., i) mentions the vigils of Christmas, the Assumption, and
the Apostles (28 June). It is likely that the obligation of
abstaining on the vigils of Pentecost, St. John Baptist, St.
Lawrence, and All Saints was introduced by custom (cf. Azor.,
op. cit., VII, xiii), for, according to Duchesne (op. cit.,
287), the element of antiquity is not the fasting, but the
vigil. Formerly, the obligation of abstaining on vigils was
anticipated as often as a vigil fell on Sunday. This practice is
still in vogue.
(7) Rogation Days
These days occur on the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday preceding
the Ascension. Mamertus, Bishop of Vienne, introduced (some time
before 474) the custom of reciting the Litanies on these days.
He also prescribed fasting and abstinence thereon. This practice
was extended to the whole of Frankish Gaul in 511 by the first
Council of Orleans (can. xxvii). About the beginning of the
ninth century Leo III introduced the Rogation Days into Rome
(Duchesne op. cit., 289). An almost similar observance
characterizes the feast of St. Mark, and dates from about the
year 589 (Duchesne, op. cit., 288).
APPLICATION OF THE LAW IN THE UNITED STATES
Diversity in customs, in climate, and in prices of food have
gradually paved the way for modifications of the law of
abstinence. Throughout the United States the ordinary Saturday
is no longer a day of abstinence. During Lent, in virtue of an
indult, the faithful are allowed to eat meat at their principal
meal on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, the second
and last Saturdays excepted. The use of meat on such days is not
restricted to the principal meal for such as are exempt from
fasting by reason of ill health, age, or laborious occupations.
Eggs, milk, butter, and cheese, formerly prohibited, are now
permitted without restriction as far as the day of the week is
concerned The use of lard or dripping in preparing fish and
vegetables at all meals and on all days is allowed by an indult
issued 3 August, 1887. It is never lawful to take fish with
flesh, at the same meal, during Lent, Sundays included (Benedict
XIV, Litt. ad Archiep. Compostel., 10 June, 1745, ap. Bucceroni,
Enchiridion Morale, 147). At other times this is not prohibited
(Bucceroni, ib.). On Wednesdays and Fridays, as well as on the
second and last Saturdays of Lent, flesh meat is not permitted.
Wednesdays, Fridays and Saturdays during Ember Week are still
days of abstinence and fasting. The vigils of Christmas,
Pentecost, Assumption, and All Saints are also days of
abstinence and fasting. In virtue of faculties granted by the
Holy See, workingmen, and their families as well, may use flesh
meat once a day on all abstinence days throughout the year
except Fridays, Ash Wednesday, Holy Saturday, and the vigil of
Christmas. This indult was issued for ten years, 15 March 1895,
and renewed for another decade on 25 February, 1905. (See
"Exposition of Christian Doctrine", Philadelphia, 1899, II,
528-529 Spirago-Clarke, "The Catechism Explained", New York,
1900; Diocesan Regulations for Lent.)
In Great Britain and Ireland, Fridays during the year,
Wednesdays during Advent, weekdays during Lent, Ember Days, the
vigils of Christmas, Pentecost, the Assumption, All Saints, Sts.
Peter and Paul, and St. Andrew (in Scotland only) are days of
abstinence. Meat is allowed by indult at the principal meal on
all days during Lent except Wednesdays, Fridays, Holy Thursday,
and the second and last Saturdays. Eggs are allowed at the
principal meal during Lent except on Ash Wednesday and the last
three days of Lent. Milk, butter, and cheese are allowed at the
principal meal, and at the collation during Lent, except on Ash
Wednesday and Good Friday. Lard and drippings are allowed at the
chief meal and at the collation, except on Good Friday. Suet is
prohibited whenever meat is not allowed. Fish and flesh are
never allowed at the same meal on any fast day during the year
(Catholic Directory, London, 1906). In Australia, Fridays during
the year, Wednesdays and Saturdays during Lent, Holy Thursday,
Wednesdays during Advent, Ember Days, the vigils of Christmas,
Pentecost, the Assumption, Sts. Peter and Paul, and All Saints
are days of abstinence. There is a somewhat general practice
whereby the use of meat is allowed at the chief meal on ordinary
Saturdays throughout the year. For the rest, the application of
the law of abstinence is much the same as in Ireland (The Year
Book of Australia, Sydney, 1892). In Canada, Fridays during the
year, Wednesdays during Lent and Advent, Ember Days, the vigils
of Christmas, Easter, Pentecost, the Assumption, Sts. Peter and
Paul, and All Saints are days of abstinence. The abstinence
incident to the feasts of Sts. Peter and Paul and the Assumption
is transferred to the eve of the transferred solemnity. Milk,
butter, cheese, and eggs are allowed during Lent even at the
collation; lard and drippings as in the United States. (See
"Expos. of Christian Doctrine", Philadelphia, 1899, II, 528,
529.)
THE GREEK CHURCH
In the Greek Church the law of abstinence is designated by the
term xerophagy in contradistinction to monophagy, signifying the
law of fasting. In its strictest sense xerophagy bars all viands
except bread, salt, water, fruits, and vegetables (St.
Epiphanius, Expositio Fidei, xxii; Migne, P.G., XLII, col. 828;
Apost. Const., V, xviii, ap. Migne, P.G., I, col. 889). On days
of abstinence meat, fish, eggs, milk, cheese, oil, and wine' are
rigorously interdicted. This traditional custom of rigorous
abstinence still binds the Greeks on all Wednesdays and Fridays,
on all days of their Major Lent, including Saturdays and
Sundays, except Palm Sunday, on which day oil, wine, and fish
are now permitted, and on the vigils of Christmas and Epiphany.
Xerophagy seems to have been obligatory only on these days.
Another less severe form of abstinence, still common among the
Greeks, prohibits the use of meat, eggs, milk, and sometimes
fish on certain occasions. According to their present regime,
the Greeks observe this mitigated form of abstinence during
their Lent of the Apostles (i.e. from Monday after the feast of
All Saints, celebrated on the first Sunday after Pentecost,
until 29 June); during Mary's Lent (1-14 August); during
Christmas Lent, or Advent (also called St. Philip's Lent, 15
November to 24 December); 29 August (commemoration of the
Beheading of St. John Baptist) and on 14 September (feast of the
Exaltation of the Holy Cross). The canonical regulations
determining obligatory abstinence have suffered no substantial
alteration during the lapse of many centuries. In its general
outlines this legislation is the same for the Greek Church Uniat
and non-Uniat. The Uniat Greek Church is not allowed to father
any innovation without explicit authorization from the Holy See
(Benedict XIV, Decret. Demandatam, # vi, in his Bullarium, I,
128, Venice ed., 1778). Though usage and dispensations have led
the way to certain modifications, the canons covering this
matter remain unchanged. Custom has made the use of vine and oil
legitimate on xerophagy days. In many places fish is likewise
allowed, except during the first and last week of their Major
Lent. Goar (Euchologium, Venice, 1730, 175) says that the Greeks
of his day were allowed by an unwritten law to eat fish, eggs,
snails, and such-like viands on xerophagy days.
Innovations in the duration of the Greek penitential seasons
have originated in usage. Thus arose their practice of spending
the week preceding their Major Lent in minor abstinence, as a
prelude to the more rigorous observance of the Lenten season
(Nilles, Kalendarium, II, 36, Innsbruck, 1885; Vacant, Dict. de
theol. cath., I, 264). This custom lapsed into desuetude, but
the decrees of the Synod of Zamosc, 1720 (tit. xvi, Collect.
Lacensis, II), show that the Ruthenians had again adopted it.
The Melchites have reduced their xerophagy during Christmas Lent
to fifteen days. The same tendency to minimize is found amongst
the Ruthenians (Synod of Zamosc, loc. cit.). The Apostles' Lent
counts no more than twelve days for the Melchites. Goar says
that their Christmas Lent is reduced to seven days. Other
alterations in these seasons have been made at various times in
different places. The Greeks enjoy some relaxation of this
obligation on a certain number of days during the year.
Accordingly, when feasts solemnized in the Greek Church fall on
ordinary Wednesdays and Fridays, or on days during their various
Lenten seasons (Wednesdays and Fridays excepted), a complete or
partial suspension of xerophagy takes place. The obligation of
abstaining from flesh is withdrawn on Wednesdays and Fridays
between Christmas and 4 January; whenever Epiphany falls on
Wednesday or Friday; Wednesday and Friday during the week
preceding the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross; during
the octaves of Easter and Pentecost. Some of the Greeks,
especially the Melchites, hold that xerophagy does not bind from
Easter to Pentecost [cf. Pilgrimage of Etheria (Peregrinatio
Sylviae) ap. Duchesne, op. cit. 569]. In their partial
suspension of the xerophagy the Greeks maintain the obligation
of abstaining from flesh meat, but they countenance the use of
such other viands as are ordinarily prohibited when the law is
in full force. This mitigation finds application as often as the
following festivals fall on Wednesdays or Fridays not included
in their Lenten seasons, or any day (Wednesdays and Fridays
excepted) during their Lenten seasons: 24 November, Feast of St.
Philip; 21 November, Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary; 7
January, Commemoration of St. John Baptist; 2 February;
Presentation of Christ in the Temple; 25 March, Annunciation of
the Blessed Virgin Mary; 29 June, The Apostles; 6 August,
Transfiguration, 15 August Assumption; and Palm Sunday. St.
Basil's rule in followed by all monks and nuns in the Greek
Church. Xerophagy is their general rule for penitential
practices. The law of abstaining from meat admits no relaxation.
The greater solemnities entitle them to use fish, eggs, milk,
oil, and wine. Feasts of minor solemnity, falling on days other
than Wednesday or Friday, admit fish, eggs, milk, oil, and wine,
otherwise wine and oil only. Finally, simple feasts admit the
use of oil and wine. The obligation of xerophagy on Wednesdays
and Fridays dates its origin to apostolic tradition (cf.
Teaching of the Apostles, viii, I; Clement of Alexandria, Strom.
VI, lxxv; Tertullian, De jejunio, xiv). The xerophagy of Major
Lent is likewise of ancient growth. There is strong reason to
think that the question was mooted in the second century, when
the Easter controversy waxed strong. Writings of the fourth
century afford frequent references to this season. According to
the Pilgrimage of Etheria (Duchesne, op. cit., 555), the end of
the fourth century witnessed Jerusalem devoting forty days (a
period of eight weeks) to fasting and abstinence. The season
comprised eight weeks because Orientals keep both Saturday (save
Holy Saturday) and Sunday as days of rejoicing, and not of
penance. There are several noteworthy evidences of those forty
days thus appointed by the Greeks for abstinence and fasting
(St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Procatech., no. 4, and Catech., iv, 3,
ap. Migne, P. G., XXXIII, 341, 347; Eusebius, De solemnitate
pascuali, no. 4, Migne, P. G., XXIV, 697; Apostolic Canons, can.
lxviii, ap. Hefele, op. cit., I, 485). The canons of Greek
councils show no traces of legislation regarding their Christmas
Lent etc. prior to the eighth century. No doubt the practice of
keeping xerophagy during these seasons originated in monasteries
and thence passed to the laity. In the beginning of the ninth
century St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople, states that
all are obliged to observe xerophagy during those seasons
(Pitra, Juris Ecclesiastici Graeci Historia et Monumenta, Rome,
1868, II, 327). It is scarcely necessary to note here that the
Greek Church has legislated nearly half of the year into days of
fasting or abstinence or both. Nevertheless, many Oriental
writers protest against a lessening of this number. In point of
fact, however, many Greeks claim that many days of this kind
scarcely win proper recognition from the faithful.
THE RUSSIAN CHURCH
The legislation of the Russian church relating to abstinence
consists of an elaborate program specifying days of penance
whereon various sorts of food are forbidden, and indicating
several festivals whereon the rigor of the law is tempered to a
greater or lesser degree according to the grade of solemnity
characterizing the fast. Good Friday is signalized by their most
severe form of exterior penance, namely complete abstinence.
During their Major Lent cold, dried fare is prescribed for
Mondays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays, as well as for the first three
days of Holy Week. On Saturdays and Sundays during this period
fish is prohibited, and crustaceans are allowed. On Wednesdays
and Fridays throughout the year, as well as on the vigil of
Christmas, baked fare and fruit are enjoined. Oil is prohibited,
and wine allowed, on Holy Saturday, on Thursday of the Major
Canon (Thursday of the fifth week in Lent), and on Good Friday,
whenever the Annunciation coincides therewith. Fish is
interdicted, but fish eggs are permitted on the Saturday
preceding Palm Sunday, and on the feast of St. Lazarus. Wine and
oil are allowed on Holy Thursday. During their Christmas Lent,
Mary's Lent, and the Apostles' Lent meat is prohibited, but wine
and oil are allowed on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays. The
same regulation applies to 14 September, 29 August, and 5
January. During Mary's Lent milk diet is interdicted; fish diet
is permitted on Saturdays and Sundays. During the other two
minor Lents the same injunction holds on Tuesdays, Thursdays,
Saturdays, and Sundays. The same regulation binds on Palm
Sunday, as well as on Wednesdays and Fridays of Paschaltide.
Finally, the feasts of the Transfiguration, Mary's Nativity,
Annunciation, Purification, Presentation, and Assumption, the
Nativity of St. John the Baptist, Sts. Peter and Paul, and the
Commemoration of St. John the Baptist, 7 January, occurring
during Lent, or on Wednesday or Friday, are marked by this same
degree of abstinence. Meat diet is under the ban, except during
the whole of carnival week. Russian monks are obliged to observe
this part of the program during the whole year. The Russian
Church suspends the obligation of abstinence during
Christmastide (25 December to 6 January, minus the vigil of
Epiphany), during Eastertide, and during the octave of
Pentecost.
SYRIAN CHURCH
All branches of the Syrian Church abstain on Wednesdays and
Fridays and during Lent, in keeping with the Apostolic Canons
(Can. lxviii, Hefele, loc. cit). The Council of Laodicea (can.
1), recognized by all Syrians, enjoins xerophagy for Lent
(Hefele, op. cit., II, 320). Nevertheless, changes and abuses
have been gradually introduced into various portions of the
Syrian Church.
JACOBITES
(a) Among the laity all adults are obliged to abstain on all
Wednesdays and Fridays. On those days eggs, milk, and cheese are
interdicted. During Lent their rigorous regime excludes the use
of eggs, milk, butter, cheese, fish, and wine. The Apostles'
Lent is observed from Pentecost to 29 June. Abstinence is then
recommended, not imposed. Mary's Lent lasts fifteen days. The
Christmas Lent is kept by monks forty days longer than by laics.
During these periods a less rigorous regime is in vogue.
Finally, their ninivitic, or rogation, abstinence continues for
three days.
(b) Following the example of James of Edessa, the Jacobite monks
and nuns observe alternately seven weeks of fasting and
abstinence, with seven other weeks wherein such obligations
apply on Wednesdays and Fridays only. Some eat no meat during
the entire Year. Sozomen (Hist. Eccl., VI; Migne, P.G., LXVII,
col. 393) speaks of Syrian anchorites who live on herbs without
eating even so much as bread, or drinking wine. Rabulas, Bishop
of Edessa (d. 435), and the Council of Seleucia-Ctesiphon (420)
(Hefele, op. cit., II, 449 sq.) forbade monks and nuns to eat
meat.
NESTORIANS
As a general rule, the laity follow the same regime as the
Jacobites. With them Lent begins on Quinquagesima Sunday.
Contrary to their ancient discipline, they abstain on Saturdays
and Sundays. They observe the same minor penitential seasons as
the Jacobites. Their ninivitic, or rogation, season is kept on
Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of the third week before Lent.
The canonical regulations for monks and nuns prescribe fasting
and abstinence as observed in other branches of the Syrian
Church. Nevertheless, at various periods, innovations and
relaxations have found their way into Nestorian communities of
men and women (Vacant, op. cit., I, 268).
MARONITES
Lent for the laity commences on Monday of Quinquagesima week and
continues until Holy Saturday. Saturdays and Sundays (Holy
Saturday excepted), together with obligatory feasts occurring
during Lent, are not fasting days, but even then meat and milk
diet are strictly forbidden. Their Christmas Lent begins on 5
December and ends on 24 December. Mary's Lent begins on 1 August
and ends on 14 August; 6 August is not included therein. The
Apostles' Lent begins 15 June and ends 28 June, although 24 June
is not therein included. Meat, eggs, and milk diet are
interdicted on all Wednesdays and Fridays except such as occur
during Christmastide, Eastertide, or the octave of Pentecost.
This mitigation takes place during the week preceding their
Major Lent and on the feasts of the Transfiguration, St. John
the Baptist, and Sts. Peter and Paul. Their legislation for
monks and nuns is simple and austere. They are forbidden to eat
flesh meat under penalty of grievous sin, unless a physician
should order it for them in case of illness. When obliged to
make long journeys, they must have recourse to the bishop or
their own local superior for permission to eat meat during the
journey (Vacant, op. cit., I, 269).
ARMENIANS
Vartan, whom the Armenians regard as the leading: exponent of
their ecclesiastical traditions, held that they were bound not
only to abide by the legislation framed in the Council of
Jerusalem, but also to adhere to the Mosaic law regarding
unclean animals (Vacant, op. cit., I, 269). The Council of
Florence condemned this rigorism and decided that the decrees
enacted in the Council of Jerusalem concerning this matter, as
well as the Mosaic regulations regarding unclean animals, have
no longer the binding force of law. The Armenians recognize the
sixty-eighth canon of the Apostles, which prescribes abstinence
on Wednesdays and Fridays, and on all days of Major Lent. The
Greek canonists Zonaras and Balsamon liken the abstinence of
Wednesdays and Fridays to that of Lent. During Lent nothing save
bread, salt, herbs, and wine is allowed the laity. Meat, fish,
milk, cheese, butter, eggs, and oil are under the ban.
Nevertheless, with time there become visible traces of
innovation in this discipline. At present the Armenians observe
the law of abstinence on Wednesdays and Fridays, except during
the octave of Epiphany and during Eastertide, i.e. from Easter
Sunday to Ascension Day. Their Major Lent begins on Monday of
Quinquagesima week and terminates on Holy Saturday. From Ash
Wednesday until Easter Day they keep xerophagy except on
Saturdays and Sundays, when milk diet is allowed. Besides, they
devote the week preceding the feasts of the Transfiguration, the
Assumption, the Holy Cross, and St. Gregory to abstinence and
fasting. They are likewise obliged to abstain for one week
during Advent, one week preceding the feast of St. James, and
another immediately before the Epiphany. The Armenian monks and
nuns never eat meat. With them the law of abstinence is quite
rigorous. They may eat fish whenever the laity are allowed to
eat meat.
COPTS
Lay people are obliged to abstain from flesh meat, eggs, and
milk diet during all the penitential seasons. Such are Major
Lent, Mary's Lent, Christmas Lent, and the Apostles' Lent. They
are bound by the law of abstinence on all Wednesdays and
Fridays, except during the interval between Easter and
Pentecost, and whenever Christmas or Epiphany falls on Wednesday
or Friday. The law of abstinence extends to Saturdays and
Sundays during their penitential seasons. During Major Lent and
Holy Week fish is prohibited. At other times its use is lawful.
Some time has elapsed since the rigor peculiar to seasons of
penance in the Orient was mitigated amongst the Copts. It was
then restricted to the observance of abstinence during all
seasons except Major Lent. Nevertheless, a goodly number of
Copts continue to keep Mary's Lent with pristine rigor. While
residing in their monasteries, the Coptic monks and nuns are
bound to abstain from meat, eggs, and milk diet throughout the
year. Whenever they dwell outside the monastery they may conform
to the regulations binding the laity.
MOTIVES OF ECCLESIASTICAL LAWS PERTAINING TO ABSTINENCE
According to the vagaries of the Manicheans, Montanists. and
Encratites, flesh meat is intrinsically evil and merits the most
rigorous kind of prohibition. Keenly sensible of this
heterodoxy, the Church of Christ has not based her ordinances
enjoining abstinence on any such unwarranted assumption. As the
exponent of revelation, the Church knows and teaches that every
creature in the visible universe is equally a work of the divine
wisdom, power, and goodness, which defy all limitations. This is
why the first pages of the inspired text indicate that the
Creator "saw all the things that he had made and they were very
good" (Gen., i, 31). St. Paul is, if anything, still more
explicit in condemning the folly of those sectaries, though they
originated after his day. "Now, the Spirit manifestly says that
in the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed
to spirits of error, and doctrines of devils . . . forbidding to
marry, to abstain from meats which God hath created to be
received with thanksgiving by the faithful and by them that know
the truth. For, every creature is good, and nothing to be
rejected that is received with thanksgiving" (I Tim, iv, 1, 2,
3). Neither is the Church, in her legislation on abstinence,
animated by any such gross superstition as influences the
adherents of Brahmanism or Buddhism. Moved by their theories
regarding the transmigration of souls, they are logically
induced to abstain from eating the flesh of animals, lest they
should unconsciously consume their parents or friends. In
consequence of those notions their diet is vegetarian. So
rigorous is the law prescribing this diet that transgressions
are visited with social and domestic ostracism. At the same time
this ultra conservatism has not been espoused by all who share
the doctrine regarding the transmigration of souls. Many of them
have not hesitated to temper their belief in this creed with a
mitigated form of abstinence from flesh meat.
Eagerness to harmonize her disciplinary regime with the
exigencies of the Mosaic legislation did not prompt the Church
in shaping the measures which she set before her children in
regard to abstinence. Though the Law of Moses embodies a
detailed catalogue of forbidden viands, Christ abrogated those
prohibitions when the Law was fulfilled. The Apostles, assembled
in the Council of Jerusalem, gave definite shape to their
convictions concerning the passing of the Old Law, as well as to
their divinely founded right to shape and mould the tenor of
ecclesiastical legislation so as best to meet the spiritual
needs of those entrusted to their charge (Acts, xv, 28, 29).
Nevertheless, legislation alone is well-nigh powerless in
attempting to change abruptly the current of traditions and
prejudices, when they are so deeply rooted in national
institutions as to form an important factor in the growth and
development of a nation. This was precisely the sort of problem
that confronted the missionary enterprises of the Apostles.
Their converts were recruited from Paganism and Judaism. Though
Jews and Gentiles were doubtless sincere in their conversion to
the new religion, previous habits of thought and action had left
more than superficial traces in their character. As a
consequence, many Jewish converts were unwilling to forego the
Mosaic law concerning unclean meats, while Gentile converts
could see no reason whatsoever for adopting the tenets of
Judaism. This diversity of sentiment paved the way to
misunderstanding, and all but open rupture, in various
communities of the early Church. This is why St. Paul speaks so
unequivocally regarding the lawfulness of all meats, but
recommends due consideration for those Christians whose
conscience will not brook this liberty (Rom., xiv; Gal., iii,
28; Rom., ii). Centuries of Christian life have so greatly
simplified this matter that it is now well-nigh impossible to
realize how there could then have been anything more than a
passing controversy. At the same time it is well to bear in mind
that in the beginning of the present era the Apostles were
called upon to deal amicably with those who based their
conservatism on the traditions of two thousand years of adhesion
to the Mosaic legislation.
Daily experience testifies that the phenomena circumscribing the
evolution of life in the material world are rooted in laws
involving a process of transition from death unto life. "The
struggle for existence and the survival of the fittest" is
simply the dictum of science admitting the presence of this law
in the animal kingdom. This law, so widespread in the material
order. has been embodied in that economy wherein they who would
imitate Christ must deny themselves, take up the cross, and
follow Him. Hence, in molding her penitential discipline, the
Church is inspired by the maxims and example of her Divine
Founder. As a consequence, she is not the author of arbitrary
measures in this matter; she simply frames her laws of
abstinence to meet the exigencies of fallen nature. Darkness in
the understanding, weakness in the will, and turbulence in the
passions must ever remain to reveal the ravages: of sin in
fallen man. Though the passions are destined to satisfy the
legitimate cravings of human nature, and enable man to develop
his being according to the dictates of reason, still they give
unquestionable evidence of a vicious propensity to invade the
domain of reason and usurp her sovereignty. In order to check
this lawless invasion of the passions, and to subordinate their
movements to the empire of reason, man is obliged to labor
unceasingly; else he is sure to become the slave of unbridled
passion. This is what St. Paul means when he says: "The flesh
lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh"
etc. (Gal., v, 17). The substance of certain viands, especially
meat, renders inestimable service to man in his efforts to gain
and retain the desired supremacy. This is what St. Jerome means
when, quoting Terence, he says: Sine Cerere et Baccho, friget
Venus (Cont. Jov., II, 6), or, to use the words of St. Thomas
(II-II, q. cxlvii, art. 1), "the ardor of lust is dampened by
abstinence from food and drink." Besides, abstinence exercises a
salutary influence in leading man to suprasensible pursuits.
For, according to St. Augustine (De oratione et jejunio, sermo
ccxxx, de temp.), abstinence purifies the soul, elevates the
mind, subordinates the flesh to the spirit, begets a humble and
contrite heart, scatters the clouds of concupiscence,
extinguishes the fire of lust, and enkindles the true light of
chastity. This is summarized in the official message of the
Church found in the Mass-preface used during Lent: "Who by
bodily fasting suppresses vice, ennobles the mind, grants virtue
and rewards." It is no exaggeration, therefore, to maintain that
Christians must find in abstinence an efficacious means to
repair the losses of the spirit and augment its gains. Inspired
by such motives, the Church wisely prohibits the use of flesh
meat at duly appointed times. Seemingly harsh, the law of
abstinence, in its last analysis, serves to promote bodily and
spiritual well-being. The mechanism of the body stamps man as an
omnivorous animal. Hence, all nations have adopted a mixed diet.
Nay. more, a priori and a posteriori reasons prove that the
occasional interruption of meat diet conduces to bodily and
spiritual health. In case of less rugged constitutions, the
Church tempers the rigors of her legislation with the mildness
of her dispensations. Finally, the experience of nineteen
centuries proves that transgression of this law neither promotes
health nor prolongs life. Hence, consummate wisdom and prudence,
seeking to safeguard the welfare of soul and body, inspire the
Church in her laws pertaining to abstinence. (See ADVENT; LENT)
TERTULLIAN, De Jejunio, P.L., II, ST. LEO I, Sermones, P. L.,
LIV; HERMAS Pastor, in Ante-Nicene Fathers (New York), II;
CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, ibid., II; Teaching of the Twelve
Apostles, ibid., VII, DUCHESNE, Christian Worship: Its origin
and evolution (tr. London, 1904); Pilgrimage of Etheria
(Sylviae), in DUCHESNE, op. cit., 547-577; HEFELE , A History of
the Councils of the Church (tr . Edinburgh, 1896), I, II, V; ST.
THOMAS, Summa, II-II, QQ. cxivii, cxlvii THOMASSIN, Traite des
jeunes d' I'Egise (Paris, 16800; LAYMAN, Theologia Moralis
(Padua, 1733); SPORER, Theologia Moralis super Decalogum
(Venice, 1761), I; VACANT, Dict. de theol. cath (Paris, 1899),
I, 262-277.
JAMES D. O'NEILL
Physical Effects of Abstinence
Physical Effects of Abstinence
The effects on the human system of abstinence from flesh meats
divide themselves naturally and logically into two parts:
+ Effects due to total abstinence (in other words
vegetarianism);
+ Effects due to partial or periodic abstinence, such as is
enjoined by the Catholic Church. These abstinences comprise
the fish observance of Fridays, the fasts before feasts, the
forty days of Lent, and the ember days. It is the partial, or
Catholic, phase of the subject with which we have to deal.
Physiologically, man is an omnivorous animal, as evidenced by
the structure and consequent nomenclature of the teeth; and a
mixed diet into which meat or flesh food largely enters, would
seem to be the natural requirement for such a complex
physio-anatomical entity. Additional corroboration of this view
is afforded by researches of physiological chemistry, and the
discovery of elements produced at various points along the
digestive tract, whose function it is to peptonize milk foods,
emulsify fats and oils, destroy the insulation of muscular
fiber, and prepare the nucleines for absorption and nutrition.
Granting, therefore, that flesh food in some form is necessary
for the human race as a whole, what are the physical effects of
partial Abstinence therefrom?
These effects are as numerous and divergent as the causes. We
have first, the family history of the individual (diseases or
tendencies inherited or acquired); second, age; third, personal
history of the individual (diseases or tendencies inherited or
acquired), natural or artificial infantile feeding; fourth,
education and environment; fifth, climatic conditions, sixth,
occupation and its effects on the physical and mental state of
the individual, seventh, status praesens, and last -- but really
the most important of all -- that indefinable but very tangible
element which we may call the personal equation in each
individual, the observer as well as the observed.
Additional facts to be remembered are:
+ That women bear Abstinence better than men, because as a rule
the former have greater development of fatty and less
development of muscular tissue;
+ that mature age bears deprivation of customary food better
than youth or old age;
+ that a very damp atmosphere, extremes of heat and gold,
un-hygienic surroundings (tenements, prisons, workhouses,
etc.), insufficient, improper, and unwholesome food, the state
of pregnancy, alcoholism, and the premature physical and
mental decadence, due to the stress and strain in the modern
battle of life, are all to be considered as important matters
for investigation in any case that has to do with the question
of Abstinence.
The Church has so wisely, and with a foreknowledge of scientific
investigation and present proof so accurate as to be almost
supernatural, taken all the above mentioned conditions into
consideration, in framing her laws regarding. Abstinence, that
there is not the slightest danger of any physical ills accruing
to those to whom these laws apply. On the contrary, it is
abundantly demonstrated by the highest scientific authority that
temporary. Abstinence from solid food - particularly flesh food,
in which there is a great proportion of waste material, and
consequently, increased wear and tear on the organs of
excretion, such as the lungs, liver, and kidneys - is greatly to
be desired in all persons, but particularly in those suffering
from acute infectious and inflammatory diseases. Those who lead
a physically active life, like the manual laborer, seem to need
animal food more continuously and feel its temporary withdrawal
more acutely than the sedentary or brain worker. Here, also, the
important element is the personal equation. The history of
mankind seems to show that while the meat eating nations of the
earth have been the most powerful, aggressive, and sanguinary
(growing, in other words, like the things they feed on), yet
they have been and continue to be conservative forces in
civilization, prolific and enduring contributors to the arts and
sciences, and, in the final analysis, strenuous upholders of
civil and religious liberty and morality. The dietetic question
raised by some as the result of the late Russo-Japanese War
means nothing as a basis of comparison. It is a well known feet
that battles have been fought, and lost, and won, alike by men
suffering from too much, too little, or no food at all. Wars and
their eventualities depend, not so much on foods as on civil,
religious, and politico-economical conditions. The medical and
scientific world of today seems to be well satisfied:
+ that while man, by structure and development, is omnivorous,
there is too much animal food consumed by the average
individual, particularly in large centers of population.
+ That owing to this large consumption of food, which has an
amount of waste out of proportion to its nutritive value, the
vital organs are overtaxed in their excretory functions, and
that consequently, human life and usefulness is very
frequently curtailed.
+ That this over ingestion of animal food is in some way -- as
yet undetermined -- closely associated with the rapid increase
of diseases like cancer.
+ That over-feeding -- particularly with strong, meaty foods --
together with leek of proper muscular exercise have much to do
with the question of so-called "race suicide". This last
suggestion arises from the well known analogy between the
reproductive processes in human and brute animals. Too much
and too rich food combined with physical inactivity has a
tendency to replace (by a process of degeneration) the
muscular fibers of the reproductive organs by fat cells, and
hence render such organs either sterile or incapable of
carrying a pregnancy to term.
YARRELL in HARVEY, The Sea Side Book (1857), Chapter on Fish and
Fish Diet; LICHTENFELT, Ueber die chemische Zusammensetzung
einiger Fischarten, etc. (Archw. Physiol. de Menschen, Bonn.
1904); LATHAM, Milbank Penitentiary (]823); SLOANE, Med. Gaz.,
XVII, 389, MCNAUGHTON, Am. Jour. of Med. Sci. VI, 543, FRENCH
ACADEMY, Archives gener. de medecine, XXVII, 130, s. v.
Pestilence and Famine in Ireland, 1847 Human Foods (U.S.
Agricultural Dep't Year Book, 1894), 547-558; (1895), 573580;
(1897), 676682; DENS-MORE, How Nature Cures; The Natural Food of
Man (London, 1892), X, 61-413; KALLE, Nutrition Tables (1892);
THOMPSON, Diet (London, 1902), Annales d'hygiene publique
(1902); Nutrition Investigations, U.S. Gov. (1894-1904);
CASPARI, Physiologische Studien ueber Vegetarismus Archiv. f.d.
gesammte Physiol. (Bonn, 1905), CIX, 475-595.
J.N. BUTLER
Abstraction
Abstraction
(Lat. abs, from trahere, to draw).
Abstraction is a process (or a faculty) by which the mind
selects for consideration some one of the attributes of a thing
to the exclusion of the rest. With some writers, including the
Scholastics, the attributes selected for attention are said to
be abstracted; with others, as Kant and Hamilton, the term is
applied to the exclusion of the attributes which are ignored;
the process, however, is the same in both cases. The
simplest-seeming things are complex, i.e. they have various
attributes; and the process of abstraction begins with
sensation, as sight perceives certain qualities; taste, others;
etc. From the dawn of intelligence the activity progresses
rapidly, as all of our generalizations depend upon the
abstraction from different objects of some phase, or phases,
which they have in common. A further and most important step is
taken when the mind reaches the stage where it can handle its
abstractions such as extension, motion, species, being, cause,
as a basis for science and philosophy, in which, to a certain
extent at least, the abstracted concepts are manipulated like
the symbols in algebra, without immediate reference to the
concrete. This process is not without its dangers of fallacy,
but human knowledge would not progress far without it. It is,
therefore, evident that methods of leading the mind from the
concrete to the abstract, as well as the development of a power
of handling abstract ideas, are matters of great importance in
the science of education.
With this account of the place of abstraction in the process of
knowledge, most philosophers -- and all who base knowledge on
experience -- are in substantial agreement. But they differ
widely concerning the nature and validity of abstract concepts
themselves. A widely prevalent view, best represented by the
Associationist school, is that general ideas are formed by the
blending or fusing of individual impressions. The most eminent
Scholastics, however, following Aristotle, ascribe to the mind
in its higher aspect a power (called the Active Intellect) which
abstracts from the representations of concrete things or
qualities the typical, ideal, essential elements, leaving behind
those that are material and particular. The concepts thus formed
may be very limited in content, and they vary in number and
definiteness with the knowledge of particulars; but the activity
of the faculty is always spontaneous and immediate; it is never
a process of blending the particular representations into a
composite idea, much less a mere grouping of similar things or
attributes under a common name. The concept thus obtained
represents an element that is universally realized in all
members of the class, but it is recognized formally as a
universal only by means of further observation and comparison.
The arguments for the existence of such a faculty are not drawn
from a study of its actual operation, which eludes our powers of
introspection, but from an analysis of its results. Its
defenders rely mainly on the fact that we possess definite
universal concepts, as of a triangle, which transcend the vague
floating images that represent the fusion of our individual
representations; and also on the element of universality and
necessity in our judgments. It is in connection with this latter
point that the question is of most importance, as systems of
philosophy which reject this power of direct abstraction of the
universal idea are naturally more or less sceptical about the
objective validity of our universal judgments.
Porter, The Human Intellect (New York, 1869), 377-430; Maher,
Psychology (London and New York, 1900), 294, 307, 310; Spencer,
Psychology (New York, 1898), I, viii; Mill, Logic (London and
New York, 1898), I, ii; IV, ii; Mivart, The Origin of Human
Reason (London, 1889), ii; Van Becelaere, The Philos. Rev.,
Nov., 1903; Newman, Grammar of Assent (London 1898), viii;
Bowne, Theory of Thought and Knowledge (New York, 1897), xi;
Bain, Education as a Science (New York, 1879), vii; Sully,
Teacher's Psychology (New York, 1887), xii, xiii.
F.P. DUFFY
Abthain
Abthain
(Or ABTHANE).
An English or Lowland Scotch form of the middle-Latin word
abthania (Gaelic, abdhaine), meaning abbacy. The exact sense of
the word being lost, it was presumed to denote some ancient
dignity, the holder of which was called abthanus or abthane. Dr.
W.F. Skene (Historians of Scotland, IV; Fordun, II, 413) holds
that the correct meaning of abthain (or abthane) is not "abbot"
or "over-thane", but "abbey" or "monastery." The word has
special reference to the territories of the churches and
monasteries founded by the old Celtic or Columban monks, mostly
between the mountain chain of the Mounth and the Firth of Forth.
Dr. Skene recommends the use of the word abthany or abthanry.
Many of these abthains passed into the hands of laymen, and were
transmitted from father to son: They paid certain ecclesiastical
tributes, and seem to have closely resembled the termon lands of
the early Irish Church.
SKENE, Celtic Scotland (Edinburgh, l887), III, 83, 261, 283; A
New English Dictionary (Oxford, 1888).
THOMAS WALSH
Theodore Abucara
Theodore Abucara
A bishop of Caria in Syria; d., probably, in 770. In his
anti-heretical dialogues (P.G., XCVII, 1461-1609) he claimed
frequently to reproduce the identical words of the great Eastern
theologian, St. John of Damascus, whose disciple he was. St.
John addressed to him three famous discourses in defence of the
sacred images. There are attempts to identify him with a Bishop
Theodore of Caria who attended the Eighth Ecumenical Council of
Constantinople (869).
MARIN, in Dict. th ol. cath., I, 287.
THOMAS WALSH
Abundius
Abundius
An Italian bishop, b. at Thessalonica early in the fifth
century; d. 469. He was the fourth Bishop of Como, in Italy, was
present at the Council of Constantinople in 450, and took an
active part against the Eutychian heresy at Chalcedon (451),
where he was the representative of Pope Leo the Great. In 452 he
also took part in the Council of Milan, convened to refute the
same heresy. Abundius is one of those to whom the authorship of
the Te Deum is occasionally attributed.
WESTCOTT, in Dict. of Christ. Biogr., I, 10; TILLEMONT, M m., X,
962.
THOMAS WALSH
Abydus
Abydus
(ABYDOS).
A titular see of Troas in Asia Minor, suffragan of Cyzicus in
the Hellespontic province. It was situated at the narrowest
point of the Hellespont, and was famous as the legendary spot
where Leander swam over to Sestus to visit his mistress, Hero.
Here, too, Xerxes built the famous bridge of boats (480 s.c.) on
which he crossed with his troops to a promontory on the opposite
European shore.
SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr. (London, 1878), I, 7 8;
MAS LATRIE, Tresor de chronologie, etc. (Paris, 1887); I, 1978;
LEQUIEN, Oriens Christianus, III, 1115-16.
Abyss
Abyss
(Greek abyssos).
Abyss is primarily and classically an adjective, meaning deep,
very deep (Wisd., x, 19; Job, xxxviii, 16). Elsewhere in the
Bible, and once in Diog. Laert., it is a substantive. Some
thirty times in the Septuagint it is the equivalent of the
Hebrew tehom, Assyrian tihamtu, and once each of the Hebrew
meculah, "sea-deep", culah, "deep flood", and rachabh, "spacious
place". Hence the meanings: (1) primeval waters; (2) the waters
beneath the earth; (3) the upper seas and rivers; (4) the abode
of the dead, limbo; (5) the abode of the evil spirits, hell. The
last two meanings are the only ones found in the New Testament.
A.J. MAAS
Abyssinia
Abyssinia
Geography
Abyssinia, extending from the sixth to the fifteenth degree of
north latitude, and situated to the south of Nubia, is, by
reason of its peculiar contour, unique among the countries of
the African continent, It has been compared, indeed, to a vast
fortress, towering above the plains of eastern Africa. It is, in
fact, a huge, granitic, basaltic mass, forming a great
mountainous oval, with its main ridge toward the east. A chain
runs for over 650 miles from north to south; seen from the
shores of the Red Sea, it looks like a vast wall, some 8,000
feet high near Kasen, opposite Massowah; over 10,300 at Mount
Souwaira; 11,000 at the plateau of Angolala, and more than
10,000 in Shoa. The Abyssinian chain, however, is mountainous
only on the eastern side. On the other, it consists of plateaux
of varying altitudes, broken up by mountains shattered by
volcanic forces, the summits of which are over 6,500 feet high
in Tigre, and from 13,000 to 16,000 in Simien. A comparative
depression, that of Lake Tana, hollows out the highlands to the
southwest. The lake itself is at an elevation of some five
thousand feet, and the neighboring plateaux, from that height to
six thousand. The volcanic mass of Gojam, on the south, attains
a height of more than 13,000 feet, while the peaks of Kaffa
arise to an altitude of some 12,000 feet. The remarkable
elevation of Abyssinia gives it a peculiar climate, and savants
have classified its territory into three chief zones. That of
the low valleys, or kollas, is a district having the Sudanese
climate, great heat, and a heavy summer rainfall. The soil is
sandy, dry, and stony; the crops, maize, sugar cane, and cotton.
Various kinds of acacias and mimosas form the sole vegetations
of these arid, unhealthy regions, whose rushing torrents of the
rainy season are but stony beds during the dry. The rocks and
caverns are the haunts of lions and leopards; the trees swarm
with monkeys. The scattered inhabitants of these burning plains
are small, withered, nervous, irritable, and quarrelsome, devoid
of the dignity which marks those who live in the high lands. The
middle zone, or Voina-dega, with an elevation of from 6,000 to
8,000 feet, is by far the largest part of Abyssinia, with an
equable heat little greater than that of the Mediterranean. Thus
Gondar (6,000 feet) has a mean annual temperature of 19DEG C.
(66.2DEGF), with 16DEGC (60.8DEGF) as the minimum of the coldest
month. This is a temperature slightly higher than that of
Southern Spain, Italy, and Greece, but as, in Abyssinia, the
summer is the rainy season, the heat is by no means so
unbearable as the summer months of the South of Europe. The
lands of this region form a series of vast plateaux, covered
with rich pasturage, the grazing ground of great herds of sheep
and cattle. The air is pure and dry, the temperature moderate,
water plentiful and of good quality; vines, olives, lemons, and
pomegranates thrive there. Nearly the whole population of
Abyssinia lives in this region. Here, too, are the cities, which
are seldom found elsewhere, as the natural divisions of the
country are such as keep the inhabitants in a state of
patriarchal feudalism. The climate is very healthy, and sickness
very infrequent. The cold zone, or dega, at an altitude of more
than 8,000 feet, is marked by a variable temperature, and by
chilly nights. The British army at a height of 10,400 feet met
with four degrees of frost on 28 March. On the heights are found
the rhododendrons, mosses, and lichens of the Alps.
Ethnology
Few eastern or African nations exhibit such various aspects as
the aborigines. Descendants of Cush are locally known as Agas,
or "Freemen", and still form the basis of the Abyssinian nation.
On the west, they have intermarried with the ancient Berbers,
and with the blacks of the Soudan, who must not be confused with
the Niger, Congo, and Zambesi tribes. On the east, Semitic
peoples, Arabs and Himyarites, having crossed the Red Sea in the
fourth century B.C., conquered the whole eastern coast of
Africa, and settled chiefly in the province called, after them,
Amhara. The invasion of the Galla tribes, in the fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries, spread through all this region, and
especially towards the south. These invasions and mingling of
races in all ages have resulted in such diversity of type that
the neighboring Arab tribes never speak of the country but as
Habech (from which the name Abyssinia is derived), which means
"a crowd" or "heap of sweepings". Abyssinia answers to the
Upper, or Eastern, Ethiopia of the ancients, and comprises four
provinces: Tigre, Amhara, Goggiam, and Shoa, four small kingdoms
entrusted to as many Ras, or Negus, whence the title,
negus-se-neghest, i.e., "King of Kings", assumed by the emperor
of Abyssinia. The whole empire contains some 4,000,000
inhabitants. According to the vague traditional legend of the
"Glorious memories of the Empire", or Kebre-neghest, the dynasty
of the Ethiopian kings goes back to King Solomon and Makkeda,
Queen of Sheba; and by it the worship of the true God and the
Mosaic law were brought to Ethiopia. Whatever truth may be in
the legend, it is certain that ancient Ethiopia was evangelized
in Apostolic times by the eunuch of Queen Candace, baptized by
Philip the deacon, but was not wholly converted to the faith
until the year 341, when St. Frumentius ( Keddous Faramanatos),
who was tutor to the emperor's two young sons, won his pupils to
Christianity. It was they who made both the capital and the
empire Christian. Nor could St. Athanasius, patriarch of
Alexandria, find one whom he thought better fitted to rule this
infant Church, than its first apostle, Frumentius.
Christianity
The whole great Ethiopian empire did not, however, become
Christian at that period; since, at the very gates of Gondar,
the aboriginal tribes of the Komant are pagans to-day, as they
have been for fourteen centuries. Moreover, even the converted
provinces retain, despite their Christian faith and Christian
morality, many traces of pagan and Judaic atavism. Even in the
nineteenth century, idolatrous superstitions, fetishism,
serpent-worship, and the cult of various jinns, Jewish
practices, rest on the Sabbath, and the custom of vowing
children to the keeping of certain religious observances till
the age of puberty are still active almost everywhere. In the
sixteenth century, King Ghelaodieos found them so deeply rooted
in the national habits that he tried to justify these in the
eyes of the Church as purely civil customs in no way contrary to
the laws of Christianity. So long as Christian Abyssinia could
remain in touch with the Catholic Patriarch of Alexandria, it
was preserved from the taint of Arianism, victorious almost
everywhere else, as well as the errors of Macedonius and
Nestorius. In the seventh century, however, the Caliph Omar,
after his conquest of Egypt, came to an understanding with the
Jacobite Patriarch Benjamin, whereby the Copts and the
Abyssinians were forbidden all intercourse with the Roman
Pontiff, but were promised toleration on that condition. Still,
the Ethiopian Church, even after the ruin of the Alexandrian
Church and of the Byzantine Empire in Egypt, resisted more or
less successfully for nearly three centuries the heresies which
infected all other churches of the East. Moreover, during the
times of schism, and of Byzantine or Muslim persecution, it
became the refuge of the proscribed Catholics. Many monuments of
the tenth and eleventh centuries, due to the Egyptian refugees,
bear witness to this fact by their Latin character, and it is
also borne out by the manuscripts of Lalibela.
Modern Missions
Communication between Rome and Abyssinia became more difficult,
and from the end of the eleventh to the beginning of the
thirteenth century one could see no bond existing between
Abyssinia and the centre of Catholicism. The Sovereign Pontiffs,
nevertheless, have bestowed a constant solicitude on the
Christians of Ethiopia. The first missionaries sent to their aid
were the Dominicans, whose success, however, roused the
fanaticism of the Monophysites against them, and caused their
martyrdom. For more than a hundred years silence enfolded the
ruins of this Church. At a later period, the fame of the
Crusades having spread, pilgrim monks, on their return from
Jerusalem, wakened once more, by what they told in the Ethiopian
court, the wish to be reunited to the Church. The Acts of the
Council of Florence tell of the embassy sent by the Emperor
Zera-Jacob with the object of obtaining this result (1452). The
union was brought about; but on their home journey, the
messengers, while passing through Egypt, were given up to the
schismatic Copts, and to the Caliph, and put to death before
they could bring the good news to their native land. More than a
hundred years later, in 1557, the Jesuit Father Oviedo
penetrated into Ethiopia. One of his successors, Father Paez,
succeeded in converting the Emperor Socinios himself. On 11
December, 1624, the Church of Abyssinia, abjuring the heresy of
Eutyches and the schism of Dioscorus, was reunited to the true
Church, a union which, unfortunately, proved to be only
temporary. In 1632, the Negus Basilides mounted the throne.
Addicted as he was to polygamy and to every vice, he showed
himself the relentless enemy of Catholicism, and of its moral
law. The Jesuits were handed over to the axe of the executioner,
and Abyssinia remained closed to the missionaries until 1702. In
that year, three Franciscans got as far as Gondar, the capital,
where they converted several princes. The Negus wrote with his
own hand to Clement XI, professing his submission to His
Holiness. Once more the hope proved futile. A palace revolution
overthrew the Negus, and heresy again assumed the reigns of
power. From then until the middle of the nineteenth century, a
silence as of death lay on the Church of Abyssinia. In 1846, the
Holy See divided Ethiopia into two Apostolic vicariates: that of
Abyssinia, trusted to the Lazarists, and that of Galla, given to
the Capuchins. In the former, the labors and successes of M. de
Jacobus awakened the jealousy of the schismatic clergy. An
ex-Emir of Cairo, who had become Abouna of Ethiopia, and a man
of low birth named Kassa, who had been anointed Negus under the
name of Theodoros, joined forces to persecute the Catholics,
drive out the missionaries, and put them to death. The Negus
Johannes IV, who succeeded Theodoros, followed in his
predecessor's footsteps. His reign of twenty years was a time of
trouble and suffering for the Catholics of Abyssinia. At last,
however, Menelik, the king of Shoa, who became Negus and was
crowned in March, 1889, restored tranquility to the missions.
Under his rule Catholic priests rest assured of justice and
protection throughout the whole Empire of Abyssinia.
Church Constitution
Abyssinia is a province of the Patriarchate of Alexandria, the
Church of Abyssinia is a daughter of the Egyptian Church, and
there is nothing to show that the daughter ever really tried to
withdraw herself from the maternal jurisdiction. Today the
Abyssinians are governed as they were in the time of St.
Athanasius. by a special delegate, who is practically the vicar
of the Coptic Patriarch of Alexandria, and is locally known as
Abouna, or Abou-Salama, "Father of Peace." He has the sole
right, throughout Ethiopia and in perpetuity, of anointing the
Negus "King of Kings"; of consecrating bishops, or ordaining
priests and deacons, of blessing altar-stones, of superintending
theological instruction, and of settling, as a last court of
appeal, disputed or difficult questions of dogma, morals, and
discipline. The law of Ethiopia demands that the Abouna shall
always be a foreigner, an Egyptian, whom the Negus obtains, or
rather buys, from the Khedive and the Coptic Patriarch of Cairo,
the alleged successor to St. Mark in the See of Alexandria.
Immediately after obtaining his episcopal consecration, and his
primatial jurisdiction, the Abouna sets out for Ethiopia, with
no hope of return; but lands and large revenues ensure him a
comfortable existence there. The Itchague, or Ethiopian
Archbishop, is the second religious personage in Ethiopia. The
Ethiopian primate is forbidden by the Patriarch of Alexandria to
consecrate more than seven bishops, but there are a considerable
number of secular and religious clergy, recruited with little
discretion, and deplorably ignorant. The Ethiopian Church has,
in addition to the priests and monks, an intermediate class, the
Deftaras, or literati, who duty it is to preserve, interpret,
and apply the written law, a vast collection of ordinances of
the Lower Empire, modified and altered by the Copts in order to
ensure the supremacy of the See of Alexandria over the whole of
Ethiopia. The liturgical language is the Gheez, a mixture of
Greek and Arabic.
Since the settlement of the Italians at Massowah and on the
shores of the Red Sea, where they have founded the colony of
Erythraea, Abyssinia has been divided into three missionary
divisions. The vicariate of Abyssinia, entrusted to the
Lazarists, and comprising Tigre, Amhara, and Gondar, contained,
in 1904, 4,000 Catholics, two churches, two chapels, six
Lazarist priests, and four native secular priests, with more
than sixty seminarians studying Gheez at Altiniena. The
Prefecture of Erythraea, in the charge of the Capuchins,
comprises the entire colony of that name, and contains 14,000
Catholics, thirty-three churches, and fifty-one priests, nine of
whom are Capuchins. The vicariate of the Gallas, in the kingdom
of Shoa, and among several tribes independent of the Negus,
contains 18,000 Catholics and twenty churches. It is
administered by twenty Capuchins, French for the most part, and
eight secular priests. There are in Abyssinia, 200,000
Mussulmans, with much influence in the country, and filling the
most important positions at court; 100,000 Pagans, and 50,000
Jews. The only Protestants who have succeeded in gaining a
foothold in Abyssinia during the nineteenth century are the
missionaries of the Swedish National Society, who, however, may
only labour in Erythraea, where they have two principal centers,
at Mancullo, near Massowah, and at Geleb, as well as certain
stations in Cunana land and in the province of Hamasen. Their
statistics give them 380 church members. The Catholic apostolate
in Abyssinia must always exercise a courageous discretion and an
unfailing mildness. The missionaries will have to contend for
many years against the Eutychian fanaticism of the monks, and
the quarrelsome nature of the inhabitants. Moreover, the
frequent political revolutions of the past give little hope of
settled peace and continued security.
Political Revolutions, Wars
The Galla, or Oromo race in the south has been the terror of
Abyssinia ever since the sixteenth century. The importation of
European rifles, as well as the dissensions among the Galla
tribes gave an opportunity (1870) to Menelik, King of Shoa, to
undertaken the conquest of all the colonies of the Oromo nation
as far as Lake Victoria-Nyanza and Uganda. This conquest was not
achieved until more than thirty years after the time it was
undertaken.
In 1846, Gregory XVI appointed as vicar apostolic to the Galla
missions Father William Massaia, an Italian Capuchin, formerly
tutor to King Humbert. The new prelate belonged to the Order of
St. Francis, which was the only one that succeeded (1636-1752)
in introducing Catholic priests into Abyssinia. The few apostles
who braved the schismatics, however, were all martyred. The
first Franciscan missionaries were beheaded at Suakin, and
Blessed Agathange of Vendome and Cassianus of Nantes were
ignominiously hanged (1638). More than a century later (1752),
three other were stoned to death in a public square of Gondar.
From this time, Abyssinia, as if barred from the rest of the
world by a wall of iron, was an impenetrable region for the
Church, and it was almost a century later that Mgr. Massaia
landed at Massowah to undertake to reanimate the old faith of
the Ethiopians. In the disguise of a merchant, under the
constant espionage of the mercenaries of the Abouna-Salama and
Theodoros, now welcomed by certain chiefs, again attacked by a
frenzied crowd, often bound and condemned to death, he always
contrived to escape. He left Abyssinia to go to France and
England, where he conferred with Napoleon III and Queen
Victoria. Having received from them important help in his work,
he returned to his mission, in September, 1853. On his arrival,
he compiled a Galla dictionary, translated the Bible, converted
a prince of Lagamara, vaccinated a hundred people daily during
smallpox epidemic, and once more fell into the hands of
Theodoros, who put him in chains. Mocked and flouted by the
populace, he was thrown into a hut open to the four winds of
heaven. His patience, however, won the esteem of Theodoros, who
released him. Having been summoned by Menelik, the young King of
Shoa, he gained his affection and aroused in him an admiration
of the Catholic religion. "You have saints," said the king to
the bishop, "and that is a wonder which neither my priests nor
my deptera [doctors] can accomplish." After a fruitful apostolic
mission of thirty-five years among the Galla tribes, Mgr.
Massaia was created a Cardinal by Leo XIII, and died in 1889,
leaving 10,000 Christians in the country.
The British Counsel, Walter Plowden, a hardy adventurer,
frequently gave the Negus Theodoros such timely assistance as
led to his success in several wars. Plowden was assassinated,
however, and his successor, Captain Charles Duncan Cameron,
failed to establish a good understanding with the African
emperor. Suspected of having had an understanding with the
Musselmans of Egypt, who had just defeated Theodoros at Gedaril
in the Sudan, he was imprisoned (July, 1863) with some German
missionaries accused of having spoken ill of the Negus. After
various promises to release the prisoners, Theodoros wound up by
brutally consigning the British Consul and the members of his
suite, together with some other Europeans, tied together in
pairs, to the fortress of Magdala, which he had chosen as his
capital. On hearing of this outrageous infringement of
international law, the patience of the British gave way, and
they declared war (July, 1867). Sir Robert Napier, who had
already made a name by his victories in India, was placed in
command of the troops assigned to this expedition. Colonel
Merewether, whose activities in this campaign did much to win
for him the rank of general, having previously reconnoitered the
ground, suggested that the landing be made at Adulis in Annesley
Bay. The British army comprised 16,000 combatants, an equal
number of servants, forty-five elephants, and a great many pack
mules. Napier, on landing in Abyssinia, (3 January, 1868),
issued a proclamation to the Ethiopians to the effect that the
sole object of the invasion was to deliver the captives, and
that he had nothing but friendly feelings except for those who
should seek to interfere with his progress. With this, the army
boldly began its march through the steep defiles of the "great
African citadel". After marching about fifty-three miles, the
vanguard reached the plateau of Senafe, where they found a
delightful climate, a temperature of 30DEG to 40DEGF, and a most
fertile country. Word reached them that several Ras and
governors of the provinces, discontented with the suspicious
Theodoros, stood ready to replenish their commissary and to
supply them with horses. Napier made this plateau his base of
operations. He was obliged to cover his line of march by three
entrenched camps, the first at Senafe, the second at Addizerat,
the third at Antolo. At last, on 10 April, the troops reached
the slopes of Silassia without having encountered a single
hostile soldier, when suddenly a cannon was fired on the
heights, and 6,000 Abyssinians hurled themselves down upon the
16,000 British. The Snider rifles, however, which the British
used for the first time in this engagement, quickly brought the
assailants to a halt, and disabled the greater number. By 13
April, the British were beneath the walls of Magdala, which
surrendered after a two hours' siege. As soon as Theodoros saw
the British soldiers entering the city, feeling himself
abandoned by all, and conquered, he put a pistol to his mouth,
and killed himself. The victorious army then released the
prisoners, whom they had hardly hoped to find alive. On 17
April, Napier, henceforth Lord Napier of Magdala, ordered the
inhabitants to evacuate the city, after which the walls were
demolished and the public buildings given to the flames. It was
necessary to hasten the return of the troops to the sea, as the
rains had already made the passage difficult. The troops
embarked as they arrived at the Red Sea, on descending from the
heights of Senafe.
This prompt and lucky campaign of the English was to inspire the
Italians twenty-eight years later to make a like bold attempt.
Their ambition designs, however, roused the whole country
against them, and the bloody battle of Adua (March, 1896), in
which almost 20,000 were killed, put an end to their rash
undertaking. In 1897, Mr. Rodd, first secretary of the British
Ligation at Cairo, was entrusted with a mission to the Negus. A
treaty was signed 14 May, and Menelik proclaimed the Mahdists
enemies of his empire. He also asked for the adjustment of the
frontiers between Harrar and Somaliland. Lastly, a
Franco-Anglo-Italian agreement was concluded which guaranteed
the independence of Ethiopia and assured to the three Powers
bordering on the kingdom their respective rights and interests.
The Abyssinian Church
The chief distinction between the Abyssinian Church and the
Catholic Church is the erroneous doctrine that there is but one
nature in Christ, the divine nature and the human nature being
in some manner unified by a species of fusion. It was in Mary's
womb according to some, or at the baptism of Christ according to
others, that the Holy Ghost effected this union. Then assuming
that the two natures in Christ, human and divine, form but one,
Mary is the mother of the divine as well as the human nature of
her Son, and becomes by that very fact, almost equal to God the
Father. To these, so to speak, original errors of the
Monophysites, the Ethiopian Church added some of its own: e.g.,
the belief that the faith of the parents suffices to save their
children that die unbaptized; the wholesale repudiation of all
Ecumenical Councils held since the council of Ephesus, and the
belief in traducianism as an explanation of the soul's origin.
Moreover, they still retain in full force various practices of
the primitive Church which have long since fallen into desuetude
elsewhere: e.g., abstinence from the flesh and blood of animals
that have been strangled; Baptism by immersion; the custom of
administering Communion to little children under the species of
wine; resting from work on the Sabbath, and the celebration of
the Agape. It may be added that no church has kept to this very
day a more visible imprint of the Jewish religion. Children of
both sexes are circumcised by women two weeks after birth. They
are then baptized, girls on the eightieth and boys on the
fortieth day. As in Judaism, they distinguish by the term
"Nazarenes" children dedicated by their parents to the
observance of certain practices or prohibitions, such as
drinking hydromel and shaving the head. The canon of Scripture
admitted by the Ethiopians comprises, besides the books accepted
by Catholics, certain apocryphal works, such as the "Book of
Enoch", the "Ascension of Isaiah", etc. The oldest translation
of the Bible into Ethiopian dates from the fourth century,
having been made in Gheez. Pell, Platt, and Dillman have edited
some of the manuscripts in London and Leipzig, but the majority
remain untouched, in convents of Abyssinian monks. The present
clergy are buried in a state of deplorable ignorance. Little is
required of secular priests beyond the ability to read and to
recite the Nicene creed, and a knowledge of the most necessary
liturgical rites. The monks in their numerous convents receive
an education somewhat more complete, and occasionally there are
found among them men versed in sacred hermenuetics, who can
recite by heart the entire Bible.
Piolet. Missions catholiques francaises au XIXe siecle (Paris,
1900), I, 1-44; Ludolf, historia Aitheopiae (Frankfurt, 1681);
Arnaud d'Abbadie, Douze ans en Ethiope (1838-50) (Paris);
Massaia, I miei trenta cinque anni nel l'ata Etiopia (Rome.
Propaganda, 1895); Holland and Hozier, Record of the Expedition
to Abyssinia (London, 1870); Tellez, historia de Ethiopia aita
(Coimbra, 1660); Wansleb, Biographie de Pierre Heyling,
missionnaire protestant en Abyssinie, 1635; Etudes historiques
sur l'Ethiopie [Text of the imperial chronicles (incomplete) and
translation with notes by Basset (Paris)].
JEAN-BAPTISTE PIOLET
Acacia
Acacia
(In Hebrew shittah, plural shittim; Theod. pyxos; Vulgate,
spina, thorn). The Hebrew shittah is probably a contraction of
Shinttah, and thus identical with the Egyptian shent; the Coptic
shonte, thorn; the Arabic sunt. Hence the Greek name akantha,
thorn, the Latin, acanthus for the Egyptian acacia. Acacia wood
is designated, "incorruptible wood", in the Septuagint, and
lignum setim, "setim-wood" in the Vulgate. The Biblical Acacia
belongs to the genus Mimosa, and is no doubt identical with the
Acacia seyal (Del.) or the Acacia tortilis (Hayne); both are
called seyyal, or torrent trees, sayl meaning torrent. They grow
in the desert wadis, or torrent valleys, of Sinai. The wood is
light, hard, and durable, and grows almost as black as ebony
with age. The ark of the covenant, the table of the loaves of
proposition, the altar of holocausts, the altar of incense, the
wooden parts of the tabernacle, were made of setim-wood (Ex.
xxv, 5). (See PLANTS OF THE BIBLE.)
VIGOUROUX, in Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895); CHAPMAN in
HASTINGS, Dictionary of the Bible, art. Shittah Tree (New York,
1902).
A.J. MAAS
The Acacians
The Acacians
Known also as the HOMOEANS, an Arian sect which first emerged
into distinctness as an ecclesiastical party some time before
the convocation of the joint Synods of Ariminum (Rimini) and
Seleucia in 359. The sect owed its name as well as its political
importance to Acacius, Bishop of Caesarea, oi peri Akakion,
whose theory of adherence to scriptural phraseology it adopted
and endeavoured to summarize in its various catch words:
homoios, homoios kata panta, k.t.l.
In order to understand the theological significance of
Acacianism as a critical episode, if only an episode, in the
logical, as well as in the historical progress of Arianism, it
is needful to recall that the great definition of the Homo
usion, promulgated at Nicaea in 325, so far from putting an end
to further discussion, became rather the occasion for keener
debate and for still more distressing confusion of statement in
the formulation of theories on the relationship of Our Lord to
His Father, in so far as that relationship constituted a
distinct tenet of orthodox belief. Events had already begun to
ripen towards a fresh crisis shortly after the advent of
Constantius to sole power, on the death of his brother Constans
in the year 350. The new Augustus was a man of vacillating
character with an unfortunate susceptibility to flattery and a
turn for theological debate (Ammianus, XXI, xvi) that soon made
him a mere puppet in the hands of the Eusebian faction. Roughly
speaking there were at this period but three parties in the
Church: the Orthodox or Nicaean party, who sympathized for the
most part with Athanasius and his supporters and who insisted on
making his cause their own; the Eusebian or Court party and
their bewildered Semi-Arian followers; and, last of all, and not
least logical in their demands, the Anomoean party which owed
its origin to A tius. In the summer of 357, Ursacius and Valens,
the astute, but not always consistent advocates of this latter
group of dissidents in the West, through the influence which
they were enabled to bring to bear upon the Emperor by means of
his second wife, Aurelia Eusebia (Panegyr. Jul. Orat., iii;
Ammianus, XX, vi, 4), succeeded in bringing about a conference
of bishops at Sirmium.
In the Latin creed put forth at this meeting there was inserted
a statement of views drawn up by Potamius of Lisbon and the
venerable Hosius of Cordova, which, under the name of the
Sirmian Manifesto, as it afterwards came to be known, roused the
whole of the Western Church and threw the temporizers of the
East into disorder. In this statement the assembled prelates,
while declaring their confession in "One God, the Father
Almighty, and in His only-begotten Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ,
generated from Him before the ages," recommended the disuse of
the terms ousia (essence or substance), homoousion (identical in
essence, or substance), and homoiousion (similar in essence, or
substance), "by which the minds of many are perturbed"; and they
held that there "ought to be no mention of any of them at all,
nor any exposition of them in the Church, and for this reason
and for this consideration that there is nothing written about
them in divine Scripture and that they are above men's knowledge
and above men's understanding" (Athan., De Syn., xxviii; Soz.,
ii, xxx; Hil., De Syn., xi). The effect of these propositions
upon conservative opinion was like that of the proverbial spark
in a barrel of gunpowder. As we look back from the standpoint of
modern Catholicism upon the circumstances of this publication,
it is impossible not to see that they occasioned the crisis upon
which the whole subsequent history of Arianism turned. In spite
of the scriptural disclaimer against the employment of
inscrutable terms, nearly all parties instinctively perceived
that the Manifesto was nothing else but a subtly Anomoean
document.
The situation was assuredly rich in possibilities. Men began to
group themselves along new lines. In the East, the Anomoeans
turned almost as a matter of course to Acacius of Caesarea,
whose influence was growing stronger at court and who was felt
to be a shrewd and not too scrupulous temporizer. In the West,
bishops like Ursacius and Valens began to carry on a like
policy; and everywhere it was felt that the time called once
more for concerted action on the part of the Church. This was
precisely. what the party in favour with the Emperor Constantius
were eager to bring about; but not in the way in which the
Nicaeans and Moderates expected. A single council might not be
easily controlled; but two separate synods, sitting, one in the
East and the other in the West, could be kept better in hand.
After a number of preliminary conferences accompanying an
inevitable campaign of pamphleteering in which Hilary of
Poitiers took part, the bishops of the Western portion of the
Empire met at Ariminum towards the end of May, and those of the
East at Seleucia in the month of September, 359. The theological
complexion of both Synods was identical, at least in this, that
the party of compromise, represented at Seleucia by Acacius and
at Ariminum by Ursacius and Valens, was politically, though not
numerically, in the ascendant and could exercise a subtle
influence which depended almost as much on the argumentative
ability of their leaders as on their curial prestige. In both
councils, as the result of dishonest intrigue and an
unscrupulous use of intimidation, the Homoean formula associated
with the name of Acacius ultimately prevailed. The Homo usion,
for which so much had been endured by saintly champions of
orthodoxy for over half a century was given up and the Son was
declared to be merely similar to -- no longer identical in
essence with -- the Father. St. Jerome's characterization of the
issue still affords the best commentary, not only on what had
come to pass, but on the means employed to obtain it. The whole
world groaned in wonderment to find itself Arian -- ingemuit
totus orbis et Arianum se esse miratus est. It was Acacius and
his followers who had skilfully managed the whole proceeding
from the outset. By coming forward as advocates of temporizing
methods they had inspired the Eusebian or Semi-Arian party with
the idea of throwing over A tius and his Anomoeans. They thus
found themselves thrust into a position of importance to which
neither their numbers nor their theological acumen entitled
them. As they had proved themselves in practice all through the
course of the unlooked-for movement that brought them to the
front, so were they now, in theory, the exponents of the Via
Media of their day. They separated themselves from the orthodox
by the rejection of the word homoousios; from the Semi-Arians by
their surrender of the homoiousios; and from the Aetians by
their insistence upon the term homoios. They retained their
influence as a distinct party just so long as their spokesman
and leader Acacius enjoyed the favour of Constantius. Under
Julian the Apostate, A tius, who had been exiled as the result
of the proceedings at Seleucia, was allowed to regain his
influence. The Acacians seized the occasion to make common cause
with his ideas, but the alliance was only political; they threw
him over once more at the Synod of Antioch held under Jovian in
363. In 365 the Semi-Arian Synod of Lampsacus condemned Acacius.
He was deposed from his see; and with that event the history of
the party to which he had given his name practically came to an
end.
ATHANASIUS, De Syn., XII, XXIX, XL, in P.G., XXVI, 701, 745,
766; ST. HILARIUS, Contra Constant., xii-xv, in P.L. X; ST.
EPIPHANIUS, Haer., lxxiii, 23-27, in P.G., XLII; SOCRATES AND
SOZOMEN, in P.G., LXVII; THEODORET, in P.G., LXXXII; TILLEMONT,
M moires, VI (ed. 1704); HEFELE, Hist. Ch. Counc. (tr. CLARK),
II; NEWMAN, Ar. IV Cent., 4th ed.; GWATKIN, Studies in Arianism,
2d ed. (Cambridge, 1900).
CORNELIUS CLIFFORD
Acacius (Bishop of Beroea)
Acacius
Bishop of Beroea. Born in Syria c. 322; died c. 432. While still
very young he became a monk in the famous community of
solitaries, presided over by Asterius, at a place just outside
Antioch. He seems to have been an ardent champion of orthodoxy
during the Arian troubles, and suffered greatly for his courage
and constancy. After Eusebius of Samosata returned from exile on
the death of Valens in 378, he gave public recognition to the
great services of Acacius and ordained him to the See of Beroea.
We next hear of Acacius in Rome, apparently as a deputy on the
part of Meletius and the Fathers of the Antiochene Synod, when
the questions connected with the heresy of Apollinaris came up
for discussion before Pope Damasus. While fulfilling this
difficult embassy he attended the meeting of the prelates
summoned to decide upon the errors of Apollinaris, and
subscribed the profession of faith in the Two Natures. It was
thus largely due to his efforts that the various schismatical
movements at Antioch were ended. A little later we find him at
Constantinople whither he had gone to take part in the second
General Council convened in 381 to reemphasize the Nicene
definitions and to put down the errors of the Macedonians or
Pneumatomachians. Meletius of Antioch died in the same year and
Acacius, unfortunately, took part in the illegitimate
consecration of Flavian. For this constructively schismatical
proceeding -- schismatical in the sense that it was an explicit
violation of the agreement entered into between Paulinus and
Meletius and tended unhappily to keep the Eustathian party in
power -- Acacius fell under the displeasure of Pope Damasus, who
refused to hold communion with him and his supporters. This
Roman excommunication lasted some ten or eleven years until the
Council of Capua readmitted him to unity in 391 or 392 (Labbe,
Conc., II, 1072). In 398 Acacius, who was now in his
seventy-sixth year, was charged once more with a delicate
mission to the Roman Church. Having been selected by Isidore of
Alexandria to convey to Pope Siricius the news of St. John
Chrysostom's election to the See of Constantinople, he was
especially exhorted by the Egyptian metropolitan to do all in
his power to remove the prejudice which still existed in the
West against Flavian and his party. In this, as in the previous
embassy, he displayed a tactfulness that disarmed all
opposition. The reader will find in the pages of Socrates,
Sozomen, and Theodoret an estimate of the high value which the
entire Oriental episcopate put upon the services of Acacius who
is described as "famous throughout the world" (Theod., V,
xxiii). We now come to the two incidents in the career of this
remarkable man which throw so perplexing a light upon the
problem of his real character that he may be called one of the
enigmas of ecclesiastical history. We refer to his sustained
hostility towards St. John Chrysostom and to his curious
treatment of Cyril of Alexandria during the Nestorian
controversy.
Acacius was always an avowed rigorist in conduct and enjoyed
great repute for piety. Sozomen (VII, xxviii) tells us that he
was "rigid in observing all the regulations of the ascetic life"
and that when raised to the episcopate his life was lived
practically and austerely "in the open." Theodoret is consistent
in his admiration for his many episcopal qualities and calls him
"an athlete of virtue" (V, iv). Early in the episcopate of St.
John Chrysostom, in the year 398, Acacius came to
Constantinople, where he was treated with less distinction than
he had apparently looked for. Whatever may have been the nature
of the slight put upon him, he seems to have felt it keenly; for
Palladius, St. John's biographer, records a most unepiscopal
saying of the injured prelate to the effect that he would one
day give his brother of Constantinople a taste of his own
hospitality -- ego auto artouo chytran (Pallad., Vita Chrys.,
VI, viii in P.G., XLVII, 22-29). It is certain, at any rate,
that from this time forth, Acacius showed himself indefatigable
in working for the great orator-bishop's removal and was not the
least active of those who took part in the disgraceful "Synod of
the Oak" in the year 403. Indeed, he was one of the notorious
"four" whom the Saint particularly named as men at whose hands
he could not expect to obtain common justice. In every one of
the various synods convened for the Saint's undoing, the
restless old man of Beroea took a leading and almost acrimonious
part, and even made a laborious, but happily futile, effort to
win over Pope Innocent to his uncharitable view. He was
excommunicated for his pains and remained under ban until 414.
Nor was his implacability quenched either by his great
antagonist's death or by the lapse of time. Fourteen years after
St. John had died in exile, Acacius is found writing to Atticus
of Constantinople, in 421, to apologize for the conduct of
Theodotus of Antioch, who had, in spite of his better judgment,
placed the Saint's name upon the diptychs. The same perplexing
inconsistency of character, considering his advanced years, his
profession, and the wide repute for sanctity he enjoyed, may be
seen also in the attitude which Acacius maintained towards
Nestorius. When his violent plea for leniency towards the
heresiarch failed to produce its effect, he worked adroitly to
have Cyril hoist with his own petard and charged with
Apollinarianism at Ephesus. Acacius spent the last years of his
life in trying, with edifying inconsistency, to pour the water
of his charity upon the smouldering embers of the feuds which
Nestorianism had left in its train. His letters to Cyril and to
Pope Celestine make curious reading on this score; and he has
the amazing distinction of having inspired St. Epiphanius to
write his "History of Heresies" (Haer., i, 2, in P.G., XLI,
176). He died at the extraordinary age of one hundred and ten
years.
The ecclesiastical historians SOCRATES, in P.G., LXVII; SOZOMEN,
in P.G., LXVII; THEODORET, in P.G., LXXXII; PALLADIUS, Vita
Chrys., VI, viii, in P.G., XLVII; BARONIUS, Ann. Eccl. (PAGI,
Crit.); TILLEMONT, M moires; NEWMAN, Ar. IV Cent. (4th ed.);
GWATKIN, Studies in Arianism (2d ed.); HEFELE, Hist. Ch. Counc.
(tr. CLARK; ed. OXENHAM), II.
CORNELIUS CLIFFORD
Acacius (Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine)
Acacius
Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, disciple and biographer of
Eusebius, the historian, whose successor in the See of Caesarea
he became in 340. Nothing is known of the date or country of his
birth, but he was probably a Syrian; and throughout his life
bore the nickname of monophthalmos (one-eyed); no doubt from a
personal defect (S. Hier. Viri III., XCVIII), but possibly with
a maliciously figurative reference, also, to his general
shiftiness of conduct and his rare skill in ambiguous statement.
He was a prelate of great learning, a patron of studies (S.
Hier., Epist. ad. Marcellam, 141), and was the author of a
treatise on Ecclesiastes. He also wrote six books of
miscellanies ( symmikta zetemata) or essays on various subjects
which have come down to us only in fragments. The student may
consult these fragments in detail in Fabricius, "Bibliotheca
Graeca", vii, 336, and ix, 254 sqq. (ed. Harless). He is
remembered chiefly for his bitter opposition to St. Cyril of
Jerusalem and for the part he was afterwards enabled to play in
the more acute stages of the Arian controversy. There is a
significant passage in the famous twenty-first oration of St.
Gregory Nazianzen, in which that champion of orthodoxy speaks of
"the tongue of the Arians" (Orat., xxi, 21) in dubiously
complimentary terms.
If, as seems probable, it is Acacius who is there referred to,
it can only be said that the story of his career fully justifies
the implication so darkly made. He was one of those imperial
prelates so effectively described by Newman (Arians 4th Cent.,
4th ed., 274) as "practised in the gymnastics of the Aristotelic
school"; and his readiness in debate and genius for intrigue,
joined to the prestige he already possessed as the friend and
successor of the great Church historian of Caesarea, naturally
singled him out as the likeliest spokesman and guiding spirit of
the Court faction, even before their first great leader,
Eusebius of Nicomedia, had passed away. He was one of the
notorious "ninety" who signed the ambiguous creeds at Antioch,
in the presence of Constantius in 341 (Sozomen, III, v), on the
occasion of the dedication of the Golden Basilica. For his part
in this transaction and for his open advocacy of a policy of
reticence towards the Nicaean formula, we find his name
mentioned in the list of those who were deposed by the Council
of Sardica in 347 (Athanasius, Hist. Ar., XVII; Epist. ad.
AEgypt., VII). Refusing to acquiesce in the sentence passed upon
him, he withdrew with the other bishops of the Court faction to
Philippopolis, where he in turn helped to secure a sentence of
excommunication and deposition against his judges and also
against Pope Julius, the patron and defender of St. Athanasius,
and against Hosius of Cordova (Soc., II, xvi; Soz., III, xiv;
Theod., II, xxvi; Labbe, Conc., II, 625-629). These penalties
which were inflicted on him at the hands of the orthodox did
nothing, of course, to diminish his prestige. If we may trust
the testimony of St. Jerome, his credit with Constantius was so
great during all these years that when Pope Liberius was deposed
and driven into exile, in 355 or 357, Acacius was able to secure
the intrusion of Felix the Antipope in his place.
The year 358 marks the culmination of his acrimonious and
undignified quarrel with Cyril of Jerusalem. The
misunderstanding, which dated. back to a period not long after
Cyril's installation, had arisen ostensibly. over a question of
canonical precedence, but was most probably rooted in the
chagrin that Acacius characteristically felt at being unable to
sway Cyril's policy entirely to his own liking. Charges and
counter-charges of heresy followed for some years, until Acacius
managed to secure the deposition of Cyril, through the
assistance of the Palestinian bishops, whom he had induced to
examine a wholly ridiculous charge of contumacy. Cyril went into
exile, but was restored to his church within two years by a
decision of the famous Council of Seleucia. But the
extraordinary credit enjoyed by Acacius with the weak-minded
Constantius was able to undo this act of ordinary justice, and,
in 360, Cyril was condemned once more -- this time through the
influence which Acacius was able to exercise at the Synod of
Constantinople. Cyril was forced to yield. He left his see and
remained in exile until the accession of Julian, in 361. The
fact, however, that Acacius received a temporary check in the
reinstatement of Cyril, at the hands of the Synod of Seleucia,
must not blind the reader to the real weight of his influence
either in the Council itself or in the ecclesiastical politics
of the time. He was among the foremost of the Arianizing
prelates who succeeded in carrying through the idea of a divided
Synod to solve the problems created by the Sirmian manifesto. In
this sense he may be charged with the bulk of the mischief
created by the definitions of Ariminum and Seleucia. The
turbulent and unscrupulous faction which rallied to the support
of his ideas in both gatherings was entirely his creation and
rightly bore his name -- oi peri Akakion.
The detailed account of his activities at Seleucia belongs
rather to the history of that gathering than to the present
sketch of his life; but some notice of his mode of procedure
will not be out of place here. The number of bishops present has
been variously estimated as somewhere between one hundred and
fifty and one hundred and sixty (Gwatkin, Studies in Arianism,
V, note G, where the original authorities are ably discussed).
The Semi-Arians were in a large majority; and Acacius had a
well-disciplined following, which, with the Anomoeans whom he
had won to his side, by holding out hopes of a compromise,
amounted to some forty in all. The first critical stage of
events was soon marked by the re-adoption of the Semi-Arian
Creed of Antioch, known popularly as the "Creed of the
Encaenia", or "Creed of the Dedication" ( he en tois egkainiois)
which was a negatively unsatisfactory profession of faith -- the
only distinct character about it being that it was Anti-Nicene
in scope and had been framed by men who had deliberately
confirmed the deposition of St. Athanasius. The next stage of
events was more significant still; for it gave Acacius and his
followers the opportunity to reveal their strength. Silvanus of
Tarsus proposed to confirm the famous Lucianic Creed, when
Acacius and his party arose and left the assembly, by way of
protest. In spite of this move the Creed was signed the next
morning with closed doors; a proceeding which Acacius promptly
characterized as a "deed of darkness." On Wednesday Basil of
Ancyra and Macedonius of Constantinople arrived with Hilary of
Poitiers, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Eustathius. Cyril was already
under censure; and Acacius refused to bring his followers back
to the synod until he and some other accused bishops who were
present had withdrawn. After a stormy debate his plan was agreed
to and Leonas, the Comes, or representative of Constantius at
the deliberation, rose and read a copy of a new Creed which
Acacius had put into his hands. While not expressly repudiating
the Lucianic formulas, it nevertheless objected to the terms
homoousion and homoiousion as being alike unscriptural. This led
to a very heated discussion, and on Thursday Acacius found
himself bluntly attacked by Eleusius, the ex-soldier and
Semi-Arian Bishop of Cyzicus.
On Friday Acacius refused once more to take part in any further
deliberations and Leonas joined with him, on the plea, as he
averred, that the Emperor had not sent him to preside over a
council of bishops who could not agree among themselves. The
majority thereupon convened without them and deposed Acacius and
some fifteen other prelates. That astute leader, however, did
not wait for the formal vote of deposition against him, but set
out immediately, with eight others, for Constantinople. On
arriving there he discovered that his object had already been
secured by the advent of a number of disaffected deputies from
Ariminum. The famous conference of Nike (near Hadrianople) had
taken place and the homoios, without the supposed safeguard of
the kata panta, had been adopted. This led to a fresh synod held
at the suggestion of Constantius in the imperial city itself. It
meant the complete triumph of the indefatigable Acacius. Homoean
ideas were established at Constantinople; and, although their
influence never lasted very long in the West, they enjoyed a
fluctuating but disquieting supremacy in the East for nearly
twenty years longer. Acacius returned to his see in 361 and
spent the next two years of his life in filling the vacant sees
of Palestine with men who were thought to sympathize with his
policy of theological vagueness and Anti-Nicenism. With
characteristic adroitness he consented to a complete change of
front and made a public profession of adherence to the Nicaean
formularies on the accession of Jovian in 363. When the Arian
Valens was proclaimed Augustus in 364, however, Acacius once
more reconsidered his views and took sides with Eudoxius; but
his versatility this time served him to little purpose. When the
Macedonian bishops met at Lampsacus, the sentence previously
passed against him was confirmed and he is heard of no more in
authentic history. Baronius gives the date of his death as 366.
For bibliography see ACACIANS.
CORNELIUS CLIFFORD
Acacius (Patriarch of Constantinople)
Acacius
Patriarch of Constantinople; Schismatic; d. 489. When Acacius
first appears in authentic history it is as the orphanotrophos,
or dignitary entrusted with the care of the orphans, in the
Church of Constantinople. He thus filled an ecclesiastical post
that conferred upon its possessor high rank as well as curial
influence; and, if we may borrow a hint as to his real character
from the phrases in which Suidas has attempted to describe his
undoubtedly striking personality, he early made the most of his
opportunities. He seems to have affected an engaging
magnificence of manner; was openhanded; suave, yet noble, in
demeanour; courtly in speech, and fond of a certain
ecclesiastical display. On the death of the Patriarch Gennadius,
in 471, he was chosen to succeed him, and for the first five or
six years of his episcopate his life was uneventful enough. But
there came a change when the usurping Emperor Basiliscus allowed
himself to be won over to Eutychian teaching by Timotheus
AElurus, the Monophysite Patriarch of Alexandria, who chanced at
that time to be a guest in the imperial capital. Timotheus, who
had been recalled from exile only a short time previously, was
bent on creating an effective opposition to the decrees of
Chalcedon; and he succeeded so well at court that Basiliscus was
induced to put forth an encyclical or imperial proclamation (
egkyklios) in which the teaching of the Council was rejected.
Acacius himself seems to have hesitated at first about adding
his name to the list of the Asiatic bishops who had already
signed the encyclical; but, warned by a letter from Pope
Simplicius, who had learned of his questionable attitude from
the ever-vigilant monastic party, he reconsidered his position
and threw himself violently into the debate. This sudden change
of front redeemed him in popular estimation, and he won the
regard of the orthodox, particularly among the various monastic
communities throughout the East, by his now ostentatious concern
for sound doctrine. The fame of his awakened zeal even travelled
to the West, and Pope Simplicius wrote him a letter of
commendation. The chief circumstance to which he owed this
sudden wave of popularity was the adroitness with which he
succeeded in putting himself at the head of the particular
movement of which Daniel the Stylite was both the coryphaeus and
the true inspirer. The agitation was, of course, a spontaneous
one on the part of its monastic promoters and of the populace at
large, who sincerely detested Eutychian theories of the
Incarnation; but it may be doubted whether Acacius, either in
orthodox opposition now, or in unorthodox efforts at compromise
later on, was anything profounder than a politician seeking to
compass his own personal ends. Of theological principles he
seems never to have had a consistent grasp. He had the soul of a
gamester, and he played only for influence. Basiliscus was
beaten.
He withdrew his offensive encyclical by a counter-proclamation,
but his surrender did not save him. His rival Zeno, who had been
a fugitive up to the time of the Acacian opposition, drew near
the capital. Basiliscus, deserted on all sides, sought sanctuary
in the cathedral church and was given up to his enemies,
tradition says, by the time-serving Patriarch. For a brief space
there was complete accord between Acacius, the Roman Pontiff,
and the dominant party of Zeno, on the necessity for taking
stringent methods to enforce the authority of the Fathers of
Chalcedon; but trouble broke out once more when the Monophysite
party of Alexandria attempted to force the notorious Peter
Mongus into that see against the more orthodox claims of John
Talaia in the year 482. This time events took on a more critical
aspect, for they gave Acacius the opportunity he seems to have
been waiting for all along of exalting the authority of his see
and claiming for it a primacy of honour and jurisdiction over
the entire East, which would emancipate the bishops of the
capital not only from all responsibility to the sees of
Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, but to the Roman Pontiff as
well. Acacius, who had now fully ingratiated himself with Zeno,
induced that emperor to take sides with Mongus. Pope Simplicius
made a vehement but ineffectual protest, and Acacius replied by
coming forward as the apostle of reunion for all the East. It
was a specious and far-reaching scheme, but it laid bare
eventually the ambitions of the Patriarch of Constantinople and
revealed him, to use Cardinal Hergenr ther's illuminating
phrase, as "the forerunner of Photius."
The first effective measure which Acacius adopted in his new
role was to draw up a document, or series of articles, which
constituted at once both a creed and an instrument of reunion.
This creed, known to students of theological history as the
Henoticon, was originally directed to the irreconcilable
factions in Egypt. It was a plea for reunion on a basis of
reticence and compromise. And under this aspect it suggests a
significant comparison with another and better known set of
"articles" composed nearly eleven centuries later, when the
leaders of the Anglican schism were thridding a careful way
between the extremes of Roman teaching on the one side and of
Lutheran and Calvinistic negations on the other. The Henoticon
affirmed the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (i.e. the Creed of
Nicaea completed at Constantinople) as affording a common symbol
or expression of faith in which all parties could unite. All
other symbola or mathemata were excluded; Eutyches and Nestorius
were unmistakably condemned, while the anathemas of Cyril were
accepted. The teaching of Chalcedon was not so much repudiated
as passed over in silence; Jesus Christ was described as the
"only-begotten Son of God . . . one and not two" ( homologoumen
ton monogene tou theou ena tygchanein kai ou duo . . . k.t.l.)
and there was no explicit reference to the two Natures. Mongus
naturally accepted this accomodatingly vague teaching. Talaia
refused to subscribe to it and set out for Rome, where his cause
was taken up with great vigour by Pope Simplicius. The
controversy dragged on under Felix II (or III) who sent two
legatine bishops, Vitalis and Misenus, to Constantinople, to
summon Acacius before the Roman See for trial. Never was the
masterfulness of Acacius so strikingly illustrated as in the
ascendancy he acquired over this luckless pair of bishops. He
induced them to communicate publicly with him and sent them back
stultified to Rome, where they were promptly condemned by an
indignant synod which reviewed their conduct. Acacius was
branded by Pope Felix as one who had sinned against the Holy
Ghost and apostolic authority ( Habe ergo cum his . . .
portionem S. Spiritus judicio et apostolica auctoritate
damnatus); and he was declared to be perpetually excommunicate
-- nunquamque anathematis vinculis exuendus. Another envoy,
inappropriately named Tutus, was sent to carry the decree of
this double excommunication to Acacius in person: and he, too,
like his hapless predecessors, fell under the strange charm of
the courtly prelate, who enticed him from his allegiance.
Acacius refused to accept the documents brought by Tutus and
showed his sense of the authority of the Roman See, and of the
synod which had condemned him, by erasing the name of Pope Felix
from the diptychs. Talaia equivalently gave up the fight by
consenting to become Bishop of Nola, and Acacius began by a
brutal policy of violence and persecution, directed chiefly
against his old opponents the monks, to work with Zeno for the
general adoption of the Henoticon throughout the East. He thus
managed to secure a political semblance of the prize for which
he had worked from the beginning. He was practically the first
prelate throughout Eastern Christendom until his death in 489.
His schism outlived him some thirty years, and was ended only by
the return of the Emperor Justin to unity, under Pope Hormisdas
in 519.
MANSI, Coll. Concil., (Florence, 1742) VII, 976 1176; Epp.
Simplicii, Papae, in P.L., LVIII, 4160; Epp. Felicis, Papae,
ibid., 893 967; THEODORET, Hist. Eccl.; EVAGRIUS, Hist. Eccl.;
SUIDAS, s. v.; TILLEMONT, Memoires, XVI; HERGENROeTHER, Photius,
Patr. von Constant. (Ratisbon, 1867) I; MARIN, Les moines de
Constantinople (Paris, 1897).
CORNELIUS CLIFFORD
St. Acacius
St. Acacius
Bishop of Melitene in the third century. The Greeks venerate him
on different days, but especially on 31 March. He lived in the
time of the persecution of Decius, and although it is certain
that he was cited before the tribunal of Marcian to give an
account of his faith, it is not sure that he died for it. He was
indeed condemned to death, but the Emperor released him from
prison after he had undergone considerable suffering. He was
famous both for the splendour of his doctrinal teaching and the
miracles he wrought.
There was a younger Acacius, who was also Bishop of Melitene,
and who was conspicuous in the Council of Ephesus, but it is not
certain that he is ranked among the saints.
Acta SS., March 3.
T.J. CAMPBELL
Roman Academies
Roman Academies
The Italian Renaissance at its apogee [from the close of the
Western Schism (1418) to the middle of the sixteenth century]
found two intellectual centres, Florence and Rome. Scientific,
literary, and artistic culture attained in them a development as
intense as it was multiform, and the earlier Roman and
Florentine academies were typical examples of this variety. We
shall restrict our attention to the Roman academies, beginning
with a general survey of them, and adding historical and
bibliographical notes concerning the more important of these
associations of learned men, for the Italian "Academies" were
that and not institutes for instruction. The Middle Ages did not
bequeath to Rome any institutions that could be called
scientific or literary academies. As a rule, there was slight
inclination for such institutions. The Academy of Charlemagne
and the Floral Academy at Toulouse were princely courts at which
literary meetings were held. A special reason why literature did
not get a stronger footing at Rome is to be found in the
constant politico-religious disturbances of the Middle Ages.
Owing to the oppression of the papacy under the Hohenstaufen
emperors, to the struggles for ecclesiastical liberty begun by
Gregory VII, to the epic conflict between Guelph and Ghibelline,
to the intrusion of a French domination which gave birth to
papal Avignon and the Western Schism, medieval Rome was
certainly no place for learned academies. But when papal unity
was restored, and the popes returned to Rome, the Renaissance
was at its height, and the city welcomed and encouraged every
kind of intellectual culture. At this favourable moment begins
the history of the Roman academies. At Rome, as at Florence, the
academies reproduced to a considerable extent the traditions of
the Academy of Plato; i.e. they were centres for the cultivation
of philosophy in that larger sense dear to Greek and Roman
antiquity, according to which it meant the broadest kind of
culture. From the earliest days of the Renaissance the Church
was the highest type of such an academy and the most prolific
source of culture. The neo-Platonic movement was an extremely
powerful factor in the Renaissance, implying as it did, a return
to classical thought and a reaction against the decadent
(Aristotelean) Scholasticism of that age. At the head of this
movement in the above named "capitals of thought" were two
Greeks, Gemistus Plethon at Florence, and Cardinal Bessarion (d.
1472) at Rome. About 1450 the house of the latter was the centre
of a flourishing Academy of Platonic philosophy and of a varied
intellectual culture. His valuable library (which he bequeathed
to the city of Venice) was at the disposal of the academicians,
among whom were the most intellectual Italians and foreigners
resident in Rome. This Platonic propaganda (directed vigorously
against the "peripatetic" restoration and the anti-Platonic
attacks of the neo-Aristotelean school) had an echo in a small
Latin folio of Bessarion, "Against the Calumniators of Plato"
(Rome, 1469). Bessarion, in the latter years of his life,
retired from Rome to Ravenna, but he left behind him ardent
adherents of the classic philosophy. Unfortunately, in Rome the
Renaissance took on more and more of a pagan character, and fell
into the hands of humanists without faith and without morals.
This imparted to the academic movement a tendency to pagan
humanism, one evidence of which is found in the celebrated Roman
Academy of Pomponio Leto.
Giulio, the natural son of a nobleman of the Sanseverino family,
born in Calabria in 1425, and known by his academic name of
"Pomponius Laetus", came to Rome, where he devoted his energies
to the enthusiastic study of classical antiquity, and attracted
a great number of disciples and admirers. He was a worshipper
not merely of the literary and artistic form, but also of the
ideas and spirit of classic paganism, and therefore a contemner
of Christianity and an enemy of the Church. The initial step of
his programme was the foundation of the Roman Academy in which
every member assumed a classical name. Its principal members
were humanists, and nearly all of them were known for their
irreligious and epicurean lives, e.g. Bartolomeo Platina and
Filippo Buonaccorsi. Moreover, in their audacity, these
neo-Pagans compromised themselves politically, at a time when
Rome was full of conspiracies fomented by the Roman barons and
the neighbouring princes. Paul II (1464-71) caused Pomponio and
the leaders of the Academy to be arrested on charges of
irreligion, immorality, and conspiracy against the Pope. The
prisoners begged so earnestly for mercy, and with such
protestations of repentance, that they were pardoned. The
Academy, however, collapsed (Pastor, History of the Popes, II,
ii, 2). The sixteenth century saw at Rome a great increase of
literary and aesthetic academies, more or less inspired by the
Renaissance, all of which assumed, as was the fashion, odd and
fantastic names. We learn from various sources the names of many
such institutes; as a rule, they soon perished and left no
trace. At the beginning of the sixteenth century came the
"Accademia degl' Intronati", for the encouragement of theatrical
representations. There were also the Academy of the
"Vignaiuoli", or "Vinegrowers" (1530), and the Academy "della
Virtu" (1538), founded by Claudio Tolomei under the patronage of
Cardinal Ippolito de' Medici. These were followed by a new
Academy in the "Orti" or Farnese gardens. There were also the
Academies of the "Intrepidi" (1560), the "Animosi" (1576), and
the "Illuminati" (1598); this last, founded by the Marchesa
Isabella Aldobrandini Pallavicino. Towards the middle of the
sixteenth century there were also the Academy of the "Notti
Vaticane", or "Vatican Nights", founded by St. Charles Borromeo;
an "Accademia di Diritto civile e canonico", and another of the
university scholars and students of philosophy (Accademia
Eustachiana). In the seventeenth century we meet with similar
academies; the "Umoristi" (1611), the "Fantastici (1625), and
the "Ordinati", founded by Cardinal Dati and Giulio Strozzi.
About 1700 were founded the academies of the "Infecondi", the
"Occulti", the "Deboli", the "Aborigini", the "Immobili", the
"Accademia Esquilina", and others. As a rule these academies,
all very much alike, were merely circles of friends or clients
gathered around a learned man or wealthy patron, and were
dedicated to literary pastimes rather than methodical study.
They fitted in, nevertheless, with the general situation and
were in their own way one element of the historical development.
Despite their empirical and fugitive character, they helped to
keep up the general esteem for literary and other studies.
Cardinals, prelates, and the clergy in general were most
favourable to this movement, and assisted it by patronage and
collaboration.
With the seventeenth century, and while the Roman Academy, in
its older form, still survived, there began a new epoch. The
Academy was constituted as a public body, i.e. it was no longer
confined to a small circle of friends. It set itself a fixed and
permanent scope in the field of science, letters, and arts,
often of a polemic or apologetic character. Naturally this
higher definitive form of the new or remodelled Roman academies
was closely allied with the general academic movement of Italy
and of foreign countries, whose typical instance was the French
Academy founded by Richelieu. It was then that academies became
practical and efficacious instruments of culture, with a direct
influence on public opinion; in this way, too, they claimed the
special attention of the heads of the State. This was especially
the case at Rome, where the papacy kept up its traditional
patronage of the most varied ecclesiastical and general
scholarship. In this period the first Roman academies that call
for mention are the "Accademia dei Lincei" (Lynxes), founded in
1603, and the "Arcadia", founded in 1656. Ecclesiastical
academies, whose scope was fixed by the counter-Reformation,
were the "Accademia Liturgica", founded by Benedict XIV, and the
"Accademia Theologica", founded in 1695. All of these are still
extant; we shall treat of them in detail farther on. After the
French Revolution and the restoration to Rome of the papal
government, the new conditions suggested the adoption of the
"Academy" as a link between the old and the new, and as a means
of invigorating ecclesiastical culture and of promoting the
defence of the Church. In this way there sprang up new
academies, while old ones were revived. Under Pius VII (1800-23)
were founded the "Accademia di Religione Cattolica", and the
"Accademia Tiberina"; in 1835 that of the "Immacolata
Concezione". The "Accademia Liturgica" was reestablished in
1840, and in 1847 the "Accademia dei (Nuovi) Lincei". Apart from
this group we have to chronicle the appearance in 1821 of the
"Accademia Filarmonica". After the Italian occupation of Rome
(1870), new Catholic academies were founded to encourage
learning and apologetics; such were the "Accademia di Conferenze
Storico-Giuridiche" and the "Accademia di San Tommaso", founded
by Leo XIII, to which must be added, though not called an
Academy, the "Societ`a di Conferenze di Archeologia Sacra",
founded in 1875. In 1870 the Italian government resuscitated, or
better, founded anew, the "Accademia dei Lincei", and in 1875
the "Accademia Medica". We shall now deal in closer detail with
these various academies.
Accademia dei Lincei and dei Nuovi Lincei (1603)
The Roman prince, Federigo Cesi (1585-1630), a distinguished
scholar and patron of letters, assembled in his palace (in which
he had a magnificent library, a botanical garden, and a museum
of antiquities) a number of scholarly persons, and with them
founded (17 August, 1603) the "Accademia dei Lincei", so called
because they took for their emblem the lynx, as denoting the
keenness of their study of nature. According to the usage of the
time, the Academy, though dedicated to physical, mathematical,
and philosophical studies, made way also for literary pursuits.
This intellectual circle was worthy of high praise, for it
promoted the physico-mathematical studies, then little
cultivated, and offset the prevalent tendency to purely literary
studies. In the end it devoted itself particularly to the study
of the exact sciences, of which it became the chief academic
centre in Italy. It was not until 1657 that its Tuscan rival
arose in the ducal "Accademia del Cimento". The Cesi library, to
which was added that of Virginio Cesarini, became a powerful aid
to scientific labours. Several of the academicians, during the
lifetime and under the patronage of Cesi, prepared for
publication the great unedited work of Francesco Hernandez on
the natural history of Mexico (Rome, 1651). An abridgment of it
in ten books by Nardo Antonio Recchi was never published. They
contributed also to the issue of the posthumous botanical work
of the prince "Tavole Filosofiche". Other colleagues of Cesi, in
the foundation of the Academy, were Fabio Colonna, the author of
"Fitobasano" (a history of rare plants), and of other scientific
works, and Francesco Stelluti, procurator-general of the Academy
in 1612, author of the treatise on "Legno Fossile Minerale"
(Rome, 1635) and also of some literary works. The Academy gained
great renown through its famous Italian members, such as Galileo
Galilei, and through such foreign members as Johann Faber of
Bamberg, Marcus Velser of Augsburg, and many others. After the
death of Prince Cesi, the Academy met in the house of its new
and distinguished president, Cassiano dal Pozzo. But
notwithstanding all his efforts the association began to
decline, insomuch that after the above-mentioned publication of
the works of Hernandez in 1651, the "Accademia dei Lincei" fell
into oblivion. Its fame, however, had not perished, and when at
the beginning of his pontificate Pius IX sought to provide an
academic centre for physico-mathematical studies, he
resuscitated Cesi's society, and on 3 July, 1847, founded the
"Pontificia Accademia dei Nuovi Lincei", inaugurating it
personally in the following November, and endowing it with an
annual income from the pontifical treasury. Its members were
divided into four classes. honorary, ordinary, corresponding,
and associate; the last were young men who, on the completion of
their studies, showed special aptitude for physico-mathematical
sciences. The Academy was directed by a president, a secretary,
an assistant secretary, a librarian-archivist, and an
astronomer. Its headquarters were in the Campidoglio. Its
"Proceedings" from 1847 to 1(970 fill twenty-three volumes. In
1870 some of the members withdrew from the Academy, which
insisted on retaining its papal character. Desirous at the same
time of a traditional connection with the past, they reassumed
the original name, and thus arose the "Regia Accademia dei
Lincei". It was approved and subsidized by the Italian
government in 1875, and began its career with an enlarged
programme of studies, divided into two classes, the first of
which includes physical, mathematical, and natural sciences, and
the second, those of a moral, historical, and philological
character. It publishes annually its "Proceedings", and is
located in the Corsini Palace, whose library, at the disposal of
the Academy, is very rich in manuscripts, printed works, and
periodicals. It numbers today about one hundred members, besides
correspondents and many foreigners. Its members have published
important works on the exact sciences, also in the province of
philology. Among the latter are the Oriental texts and
dissertations of Professor Ignazio Guidi, many of which are of
great value for the ecclesiastical sciences. Since 1870 the
"Pontificia Accademia dei Nuovi Lincei" has continued its
labours and the publication of its annual "Proceedings" bearing
upon the physico-mathematical sciences. It has quarters in the
palace of the Cancelleria Apostolica, and has a cardinal-patron.
On the original "Accademia dei Lincei" see the work of its
historian, Giano Planco (Giovanni Bianchi di Rimini), published
in the second edition of the above-described work of Fabio
Colonna (II Fitobasano, Florence, 1744). The "Statuto" or
constitution of the "Lincei" was published in Latin at Rome in
1624. For other information on the two academies, pontifical and
royal, see their "Proceedings".
Pontificia Accademia degli Arcadi (1690)
The origins of this famous literary academy were not different
from those of similar societies of the same period. A number of
literary dilettanti, accustomed to those occasional meetings in
villas and gardens that were so pronounced a feature of social
life during the eighteenth century, conceived the idea of a
better organization of their literary entertainments. In this
manner arose the academy to which, in accordance with
contemporary taste, they gave the poetical name of "Arcadia".
The members called themselves "shepherds", and assumed classical
names. All this has been narrated more or less sarcastically by
various critics and encyclopaedias, with undisguised contempt
for such "pastoral follies". In their easy contempt, however,
they fail to explain how such trivial beginnings and puerile
aims succeeded in giving to the "Arcadia" its great vigour and
repute, even though merely relative. The true reason of its fame
lies in the fact that in addition to the usual "pastoral"
literature, then and thereafter the peculiar occupation of so
many academies, the "Arcadia" carried out an artistic and
literary programme of its own, that was then; speaking
generally, both opportune and important. It was the era of
triumph of that bombastic, meaningless, and paradoxical style
known as the "seicentismo" from the century (1600-1700) in which
it flourished, and that bore in England the name of "euphuism".
In Italy, this "seicentesco" style had ruined literature and
art. It was the time when Achillini wrote a sonnet to say that
the cannon of Charles V used the world for a ball, and begged
fire to sweat in order properly to fuse the various metals
needed for the artillery of Caesar. This detestable taste, which
tended to lower not only letters and arts, but also the dignity
and gravity of society, found in the "Arcadia" an organized
opposition. There is no doubt that in general the "Arcadia" and
"Arcadianism" often fell into the contrary extreme and, in
opposition to an artificial literature, conceited and bombastic,
produced another literature whose simplicity was equally
artificial, and for the laboured conceits of sonnets a bomba,
such as the aforementioned one of Achillini, substituted only
too many in which swains and sheep bleated in unison their
farfetched idylls. In spite of these extremes the attitude of
the "Arcadia" was beneficial. It called for a return to the
simplicity of nature. So imperative was this recall to nature
that in various ways it made itself heard elsewhere in Europe.
It is well known that precisely at this time in France, the art
of Greuze and of Watteau, and the "pastoral" literature,
heralded at once and stimulated that cult of simplicity and
nature (in itself an art product) which sprang up in letters and
art, and even in the court, at the time of Rousseau and Marie
Antoinette. This is why the "Arcadia" endured and acquired such
high repute that it counted among its members the principal
literary men of the time, e.g. Menzini, Sergardi, Redi,
Metastasio, Rolli, Filicaia, Guidi, Maggi, and others, some of
whose names are still honoured in the history of Italian
literature.
The beginnings of the "Arcadia" date back to February, 1656,
when it arose under the auspices of the celebrated Queen
Christina of Sweden, but it did not take on its definite form
and official name until after the death of its patroness (1689).
The "Arcadia" chose as its emblem the pipe of Pan with its seven
unequal reeds. The fourteen founders selected as first "Custode
di Arcadia", or president of the Academy, the somewhat mediocre
writer, but enthusiastic votary of letters, Giovanni Mario
Crescimbeni (Alfesibeo Cario), b. in Macerata, 1663, d. at Rome,
1728, author of a history of Italian poetry and of various
literary works. The first solemn gathering of the "Arcadi was
held on the Gianicolo, in a wood belonging to the Reformed
Minorites (Franciscans), 5 October, 1690. In 1692, the meetings
were transferred to the Esquiline in the gardens of Duke Orsini;
in 1696, to the Farnese gardens on the Palatine. Finally, the
generosity of John V, King of Portugal, one of its members,
under the name of Arete Melleo, enabled the society to secure
(1773) on the Gianicolo a site known as the "Bosco Parrasio".
Here they held their meetings on fine summer days, meeting for
their winter seances at the "Teatro degli Arcadi", in the
Salviati Palace. While the "Arcadia" was yet on the Palatine,
its "Statuto" (constitution) was drawn up. Owing to an
exaggerated admiration of antiquity, ever the organic defect of
this academy, this constitution (the work of Gravina) was
modelled on the ancient Roman laws of the "Twelve Tables", and
was engraved on marble. Unfortunately, differences soon arose
between Gravina and the president, Crescimbeni, one of those
petty enmities injurious to the society. Nevertheless, "Arcadia"
retained its vigour. Soon all the principal cities of Italy had
imitated it, and this confirms our previous statement that,
apart from its "pastorellerie", or affected sylvan note, the
Arcadian movement marked a positive advance in the reformation
of literature. Noblemen, ecclesiastics, and laymen, men famous
in every walk of life, held membership in it as an honour; very
soon it numbered 1,300. But its very numbers were its undoing.
Not a few of them were henceforth mediocre or even dull, and in
this way an institution called into being for the improvement of
letters became itself a menace thereto. The arrogant rococo
style in art and letters had, indeed, merited the attacks made
upon it by the "Arcadia", and for this reason the latter
received, directly and indirectly, a large measure of
endorsement. But "Arcadianism", with its own exaggerations and
one-sidedness, soon developed into a genuine peril for
literature and art. It even reflected on the public
intelligence, since the mob of "Arcadia", while pretending to
simplicity and naturalness, frequently hid a great poverty of
thought beneath a superficial literary air. Its principal
members, moreover, often sounded the depths of bad taste. Among
these may be specified one Bettinelli, notorious for his
disparagement of Dante. The violence of the anti-Arcadian
reaction was owing to its chief leaders, Baretti and Parini, and
to the fact that, consciously or not, this reaction gave vent to
the new spirit now dominant on the eve of the French Revolution.
Arcadianism fell, the, last and unsuccessful tentative, literary
and artistic, of the ancient regime. This explains why, in
certain quarters, since the Revolution, the Arcadia, both as an
academy and as a symbol, has been the object of much contempt,
exaggerated at the best when it is not absolutely unjust.
Nevertheless, when the first onslaught of the Revolution had
lapsed, "Arcadia" strove to renew itself in accord with the
spirit of the times, without sacrificing its traditional system
of sylvan associations and pastoral names. The academy no longer
represented a literary school, but merely a general tendency
towards the classic style. Dante came to be greatly honoured by
its members, and even to this day its conferences on the great
poet are extremely interesting. Furthermore, the academic field
was enlarged so as to include all branches of study, in
consequence of which history, archaeology, etc. attracted, and
continue to attract, assiduous students. The new Arcadian
revival was marked by the foundation (1819) of the Giornale
Arcadico, through the efforts of the distinguished scholars,
Perticari, Biondi, Odescalchi, and Borghesi. Its fifth series
closed in 1904. The current (sixth) series began in 1906 as a
monthly magazine of science, letters, and arts. On account of
its frankly Catholic character the Arcadia has provoked
opposition on the part of anti-Catholic critics, who affect to
belittle it in the eyes of a thoughtless public, as if even
today its "shepherds" did nothing but indite madrigals to
Phyllis and Chloe. Nevertheless, its scientific, literary, and
artistic conferences, always given by scholars of note, are
largely attended. Since 1870 there have been established four
sections of philology (Oriental, Greek, Latin, and Italian), one
of philosophy, and one of history. The Pope. foremost of the
members, promotes its scientific and literary development. Its
present location is near San Carlo al Corso, 437 Corso Umberto
I. Cf. Crescimbeni, "Storia della volgar Poesia" (Rome 1698) Bk.
VI, and "La Storia d' Arcadia" (Rome, 1709). For its history in
recent times see the files of the Giornale Arcadico.
Pontificia Accademia Teologica
Like its sister societies at Rome, this academy was of private
origin. In 1695, a number of friends gathered in the house of
the priest, Raffaele Cosma Girolami, for lectures and
discussions on theological matters. These meetings soon took on
the character of an academy. In 1707 it was united to the
Accademia Ecclesiastica. Clement XII gave it formal recognition
in 1718 and assigned it a hall in the Sapienza (University of
Rome), thereby making it a source of encouragement for young
students of theology. The academy disposed of a fund of eighteen
thousand scudi ($18,000), the income of which was devoted to
prizes for the most proficient students of theology. Among the
patrons were several cardinals, and the professors in the
theological faculty in the University acted as censors. The
successors of Clement XII continued to encourage the academy. In
1720 Clement XIII ordered that among its members twenty indigent
secular priests should receive for six years from the papal
treasury an annual allowance of fifty scudi and, other things
being equal, should have the preference in competitive
examinations. It is on these lines, substantially, that its work
is carried on at present. The Academy is located in the Roman
Seminary.
Pontificia Accademia Liturgica
This academy was the one result of the notable movement in
liturgical studies which owed so much to the great theologian
and liturgist, Benedict XIV (1745-8). Disbanded in the time of
the Revolution, the Academy was reorganized by the Lazarists,
under Gregory XV (1840), and received a cardinal-protector. It
continues its work under the direction of the Lazarists, and
holds frequent conferences in which liturgical and cognate
subjects are treated from the historical and the practical point
of view. It is located in the Lazarist house, and its
proceedings are, since 1886, published in the Lazarist monthly
known as "Ephemerides Liturgicae" (Liturgical Diary).
Pontificia Accademia di Religione Cattolica
The urgent need of organizing Catholic apologetics with a view
to the anti-Christian polemics of the "Encyclopedie" and the
Revolution gave rise to this academy. The Roman priest Giovanni
Fortunato Zamboni founded it in 1801, with the avowed aim of
defending the dogmatic and moral teaching of the Church. It was
formally recognized by Pius VII, and succeeding popes have
continued to give it their support. It holds monthly meetings
for the discussion of various points in dogmatic and moral
theology, in philosophy, history, etc. Its conferences are
generally published in some periodical, and a special edition is
printed for the Academy. A number of these dissertations have
been printed, and form a collection of several volumes entitled
"Dissertazioni lette nella Pontificia Accademia Romana di
Religione Cattolica". The Academy has for honorary censors a
number of cardinals. The president of the Academy is also a
cardinal. It includes promoters, censors, resident members, and
corresponding members. It awards an annual prize for the members
most assiduous at the meetings, and is located in the palace of
the Cancelleria Apostolica.
Pontificia Accademia Tiberina
In 1809 the well-known archaeologist, A. Nibby, founded the
short-lived "Accademia Ellenica". In 1813 many of its members
withdrew to found the "Accademia Tiberina". One of the members,
A. Coppi, drew up its first rules, according to which the
Academy was to devote itself to the study of Latin and Italian
literature, hold a weekly meeting, and a public session monthly.
Great scientific or literary events were to be signalized by
extraordinary meetings. It was also agreed that the Academy
should undertake the history of Rome from Odoacer to Clement
XIV, as well as the literary history from the time of that
pontiff. The historiographer of the Academy was to edit its
history and to collect the biographies of famous men, Romans or
residents in Rome, who had died since the foundation of the
"Tiberina". For this latter purpose there was established a
special "Necrologio Tiberiano". The Academy began in 1816 the
annual coinage of commemorative medals. When Leo XII ordered
(1825) that all the scientific associations in Rome should be
approved by the Sacred Congregation of Studies, the "Tiberina
received official recognition; its field was enlarged, so as to
include research in art, commerce, and especially in
agriculture. Pius VII had done much for the promotion of
agriculture in the States of the Church, and Leo XII was
desirous of continuing the good work of his predecessor. Under
Gregory XVI, in 1831, a year of grave disorders and political
plottings, the Academy was closed, but it was soon reopened by
the same pontiff, who desired the "Tiberina" to devote itself to
general culture, science, and letters, Roman history and
archaeology, and to agriculture. The meetings were to be
monthly, and it was to print annual reports, or Rendiconti. The
Academy was thus enabled to establish important relations with
foreign scientists. Its members, resident, corresponding, and
honorary, were 2,000. The "Tiberina" is at present somewhat
decadent; its proceedings are no longer printed. Its last
protector was Cardinal Parocchi. Like several other Roman
Academies, it is located in the Palace of the Cancelleria
Apostolica.
Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia
A revival of archaeological study, due as much to love of art as
to documentary researches in the interest of history, occurred
in Rome towards the end of the seventeenth century, especially
after the famous work of Antonio Bosio on the Catacombs had
drawn the attention of archaeologists to a world forgotten until
then. This revival culminated in an academical organization, in
the time of Benedict XIV, under whose learned patronage was
formed an association of students of Roman archaeology. In a
quiet way this association kept up its activity until the
beginning of the nineteenth century, when the renaissance of
classical art due, in Italy, to Canova gave a flesh impulse to
the study of antiquity. In 1816 Pius VII, on the recommendation
of Cardinal Consalvi, and of Canova himself, gave official
recognition to the "Accademia Romana di Archeologia" already
established under the Napoleonic regime. The Academy became a
most important international centre of archaeological study, the
more so as there had not yet been established at Rome the
various national institutes of history and archaeology. Among
the illustrious foreign members and lecturers of whom the
Academy could then boast may be named Niebuhr, Akerblad,
Thorwaldsen, and Nibby. Popes and sovereigns wished to be
inscribed among its members, or to testify in other ways to the
esteem in which they held it. Among these were Frederick William
IV of Prussia, Charles Albert of Sardinia, and others. Among its
distinguished Italian members were Canova, Fea, Piali, and
Canina. Prizes were established for the best essays on Roman
antiquity, many of which were awarded to learned foreigners
(Ruperti, Herzen, etc.). Among the merits of the Academy we must
reckon its defence of the rights of art and history in the city
of Rome, where, side by side with princely patronage, survived
from the old Roman law a certain absolutism of private-property
rights which often caused or perpetuated serious damages to the
monuments, or inconvenience in their study. Thus, after a long
conflict with the owners of hovels that backed upon the
Pantheon, the Academy succeeded in obtaining from Pius IX a
decree for the demolition of the houses on the left side of the
Rotonda (Pantheon), and also protested efficaciously against the
digging of new holes in the walls of this famous document in
stone. Similarly, the Academy prevented certain profanations
projected by bureaucrats or by unscrupulous engineers. When, in
1833, an attempt was made to remove the tomb of Raphael, the
earnest protest of the Academy was heeded by Gregory XVI as the
expression of a competent judgment. Through one of its members,
Giovanni Azzurri, it advocated the restoration of the Tabularium
on the Capitoline Hill. Through another member, Pietro Visconti,
it succeeded in abolishing the purely commercial administration
of the excavations at Ostia, and placed them on a scientific
basis. For this purpose it obtained from Pius IX a decree
ordaining that all excavations should be kept open, be carefully
guarded, and be made accessible to students. In 1824, Campanari,
a member of the Academy, proposed the establishment of an
Etruscan Museum. The Academy furthered this excellent idea until
it was finally realized in the Vatican by Gregory XVI. In 1858,
Alibrandi advocated the use of epigraphical monuments in the
study of law, and so anticipated the establishment of chairs for
this special purpose in many European universities. By these and
many other useful services the Academy won in a special degree
the good will of the popes. Pius VIII gave it the title of
"Pontifical Academy". On the revival of archaeological studies
at Rome, Gregory XVI and Pius IX took the Academy under their
special protection, particularly when its guiding spirit was the
immortal Giambattista De Rossi. Leo XIII awarded a gold medal
for the best dissertation presented at the annual competition of
the Academy, on which occasion there are always offered two
subjects, one in classical and the other in Christian
archaeology, either of which the competitors are free to choose.
The seal of the Academy represents the ruins of a classical
temple, with the motto: In apricum proferet (It will bring to
light). The last revision of its constitution and bylaws was
published 28 December, 1894. In 1821 was begun the publication
of the "Dissertazioni della Pontificia Accademia Romana di
Archeologia" which reached in 1864 its sixteenth volume. The
Cardinal Camerlengo is its protector. It has a steady membership
of one hundred, thirty of whom are ordinary members; the others
are honorary, corresponding, and associate, members. The Academy
met at first in Campidoglio; under Gregory XVI, at the
University. At present its meetings are held in the palace of
the Cancelleria Apostolica. See "Leggi della Pontificia
Accademia Romana di Archeologia" (Rome, 1894); "Omaggio al II
Congresso Internazionale di Archeologia Cristiana in Roma"
(Rome, 1900); "Bullettino di Archeologia Cristiana" of Giovanni
Battista De Rossi (to the end of 1894) passim; "Il Nuovo
Bullettino di Archeologia Cristiana" (Rome, 1894-1906).
Accademia Filarmonica
It was founded in 1821 for the study and practice of music. It
has 200 members, and is located at 225, Piazza San Marcello.
Pontificia Accademia della Immacolata Concezione
This academy was founded in 1835 by young students of Sant'
Apollinare (Roman Seminary) and of the Gregorian University.
Among its founders Monsignor Vincenzo Anivitti deserves special
mention. Its purpose was the encouragement of serious study
among the youth of Rome. Hence, two-thirds of the members must
be young students. Its title was assumed at a later date. It was
approved in 1847 by the Sacred Congregation of Studies. The work
is divided into five sections: theology; philology and history;
philosophy; physics, ethics and economics. Its meetings are held
weekly, and in 1873 it began to publish bimonthly reports of its
proceedings under the title "Memorie per gli Atti della Pont.
Accademia della Immacolata Concezione". Twenty-one numbers were
issued. Since 1875 the Academy has published many of the
lectures read before its members. The most flourishing period of
this academy was from 1873 to 1882. Among its most illustrious
deceased members may be mentioned Father Secchi, S.J., Monsignor
Balan, and Michele Stefano De Rossi. The Academy, now in its
decline, is attached to the Church of the Santi Apostoli.
Regia Accademia Medica
It was founded in 1875 for the study of medical and cognate
sciences, has fifty ordinary members, and is located in the
University.
Pontificia Accademia di Conferenze Storico-Giuridiche
This academy was founded in 1878 to encourage among Catholics
the study of history, archaeology, and jurisprudence. In 1880 it
began to publish a quarterly entitled "Studi e Documenti di
Storia e di Diritto", highly esteemed for its learned articles
and for its publication of important documents with apposite
commentaries. After an existence of twenty-five years this
review ceased to appear at the end of 1905. The president of the
Academy is a cardinal, and it holds its meetings in the Roman
Seminary.
Pontificia Accademia Romana di San Tommaso di Aquino
When Leo XIII at the beginning of his pontificate undertook the
restoration of scholastic philosophy and theology, this academy
was founded (1880) for the diffusion of Thomistic doctrine. Its
president is a cardinal, and its meetings are held in the Roman
Seminary.
Academic Schools of Rome
The following is a brief account of the several academic schools
mentioned above. One is ecclesiastical, the others are devoted
to the fine arts. Some are Roman, and others are foreign:
Pontificia Accademia dei Nobili Ecclesiastici
It was founded in 1701 by Clement XI, to prepare for the
diplomatic service of the Holy See a body of men trained in the
juridical sciences and in other requisite branches of learning.
At the time, European diplomacy was usually confided to the
nobility; hence the Academy was instituted and maintained for
noble ecclesiastics. However, later, it opened its doors more
freely to the sons of families in some way distinguished and in
comfortable circumstances. Occasionally this academy languished,
especially in the first half of the nineteenth century, but
since then it has recovered and has steadily improved. Of late
it has become a school of higher ecclesiastical education, with
an eye to a diplomatic career for its students. This, however,
does not imply that all its students, or even a majority of
them, are destined for that career; indeed, the school tends
constantly to set aside its earlier limitation. The academic
course includes ecclesiastical diplomacy, political economy,
diplomatic forms ( stile diplomatico), the principal foreign
languages, and, in addition, a practical course (after the
manner of apprenticeship) at the bureaux of various
congregations for such students as wish to prepare themselves
for an office in any of these bodies. As a rule, Romans are not
admitted to this academy, it having been expressly designed for
those who, not being Romans, would have no other opportunity to
acquire such a peculiar education and training. Its students pay
a monthly fee. It has a cardinal-protector and a Roman prelate
for president (rector). It owns and occupies its own palace (70,
Piazza della Minerva).
The Roman Academies in the service of the fine arts are the
following: Regia Accademia Romana di San Luca (Accademia delle
Belle Arti). This academy exhibits the evolution of the Roman
corporation of artist-painters, reformed under Sixtus V (1577)
by Federigo Zuccari and Girolamo Muziano. It took then the title
of academy, and had for its purpose the teaching of the fine
arts, the reward of artistic merit, and the preservation and
illustration of the historic and artistic monuments of Rome. In
respect of all these it enjoyed papal approval and
encouragement. It rendered great services and counted among its
members illustrious masters and pupils. In 1870 it passed under
the control of the new government, and is now under the
patronage of the King. It possesses a gallery of paintings and
an excellent library, open to the public (44, Via Bonella).
Regia Accademia di Santa Cecilia
(Accademia di Musica). Pierluigi da Palestrina and G.M. Nanini
founded in 1570 a school of music that was later (1583)
canonically erected into a confraternity, or congregation, by
Gregory XIII. The popes encouraged this association as an ideal
instrument for the dissemination of good taste and the promotion
of musical science. Urban VIII decreed that no musical works
should be published without the permission of the censors of
this congregation, and that no school of music or of singing
should be opened in any church without the written permission of
its deputies. This very rigorous ordinance provoked numerous
complaints from interested parties, and its restrictions were
soon much neglected. In 1684 Innocent XI conceded to the
congregation the right to admit even foreign members, and in
1774 women were admitted as members. Owing to the political
troubles of the period, the congregation was suspended from 1799
to 1803, and again from 1809 to 1822. Among its members have
been illustrious musicians. We may mention, besides the
above-named founders, Carissimi; Frescobaldi, the organist;
Giuseppe Tartini, violinist and author of a new system of
harmony; the brothers Fede, celebrated singers; and Muzio
Clementi, pianist. From 1868 John Sgambati and Ettore Finelli
taught gratuitously in this academy. Since 1870 the congregation
of St. Cecilia has been transformed into a Royal Academy. In
1876 the "Liceo di Musica" was added to it, with a substantial
appropriation from the funds of the province and city of Rome.
In 1874 the statutes of this school were remodelled. It is
greatly esteemed and is much frequented (18, Via dei Greci).
Accademia di Raffaele Sanzio
This is a school of modern foundation, with daily and evening
courses for the study of art (504, Corso Umberto I).
There are several foreign academies of a scholastic kind. The
American Academy, founded in 1896, is located in the Villa del'
Aurora (42, Via Lombardi). The Academie de France was founded by
Louis XIV in 1666. This illustrious school has given many great
artists to France. Its competitive prize ( Prix de Rome) is very
celebrated: It owns and occupies its own palace, the Villa
Medici on the Pincio. The English Academy was founded in 1821,
and possesses a notable library (53, B Via Margutta). The
Accademia di Spagna was founded in 1881 (32, B Piazza San Pietro
in Montorio). Finally, it should be noted that, as formerly,
there are now in Rome various associations which are true
academies and may be classed as such, though they do not bear
that name.
Societa di Conferenze di Sacra Archeologia
(Founded in 1875 by Giambattista De Rossi). Its name is well
merited, expressing as it does the active contributions of its
members. In each conference are announced or illustrated new
discoveries and important studies are presented. The meetings
are held monthly, from November to March and are open to the
public. This excellent association has done much to popularize
the study of Christian archaeology, especially the study of the
Roman catacombs. Its proceedings are published annually in the
"Nuovo Bulletino di Sacra Archeologia". Its sessions are held in
the palace of the Cancelleria Apostolica.
Circolo Giuridico di Roma
It was founded in 1899, and offers a meeting-ground for students
and professors of legal and sociological lore, and sciences,
through lectures, discussions, etc. Attached to it is the
"Istituto di Diritto Romano" founded in 1887 for the promotion
of the study of Roman law (307, Corso Umberto I).
The British and American Archaeological Society
Founded in 1865 to promote among English-speaking people,
through discussions and lectures (for which latter it possesses
a convenient library), a broader and more general culture in all
that pertains to Rome (72, Via San Nicola da Tolentino).
The general bibliography of the Roman Academies is very
deficient, as is that of the greater part of the individual
Academies. Besides the best guides and monographs on Rome, the
following works may be consulted: JARKINS, specimen historiae
Academiarum Italiae (Leipzig, 1725); GISBERTI, Storia delle
Accademie d Italia (Venice, 1747); CANTU, Memorie delle Moderne
Accademie d Italia, in Annali Universali di Statistica (Milan,
1841). In several of the principal French and Italian
encyclopaedias there are noteworthy articles on the Arcadia, the
Lincei, the Acad mie de France, etc.
U. BENIGNI
The French Academy
The French Academy
The French Academy was founded by Cardinal de Richelieu in 1635.
For several years a number of learned gentlemen, such as Godeau,
de Gombeaud, Giry, Chaplain, Habert, de Serizay, and the Abbe
Cerisy de Malleville, had met once a week at Conrart's house for
the purpose of discussing literary subjects. Through the Abbe de
Boisrobert the existence of this society became known to
Cardinal de Richelieu, who conceived the idea of making it a
national institution. In 1635 the French Academy was formally
established by royal letters-patent. The number of its members
was fixed at forty, and statutes were drawn up which have
suffered scarcely any change since that time. At the head of the
Academy were three officers: a director, to preside at its
meetings; a chancellor, to have the custody of its archives and
the seal; a perpetual secretary, to prepare its work and keep
its records. The perpetual secretary was appointed by lot for
life with a salary of 6,000 francs a year. The director and the
chancellor were at first appointed by lot for two months only.
At present they are elected by vote for the term of three
months. They are simply primi inter pares, and receive, like all
the other members, an annual salary of 1,500 francs. The manner
of electing members has been changed several times since 1635.
At present, when an Academician dies, candidates who think
themselves eligible present themselves to fill the vacancy. The
new member is elected by the majority of the entire body. About
a year later his public reception takes place. In the early
years of the Academy all its members were Catholics. Among the
distinguished men who held seats in it are the following:
Corneille, Racine, Boileau, La Bruyere, d'Aguesseau, Bossuet,
Fenelon, Flechier, Mabillon, Lamoignon, Seguier, Fleury,
Delille, Chateaubriand, Lamartine, de Barante, de Tocqueville,
Berryer, Lacordaire, Dupanloup, de Falloux, Gratry Montalembert,
Ampere, Pasteur, de Bornier, Cardinal Perraud, all of them
faithful sons of the Church. Among other Catholic members of the
French Academy we shall mention: Brunetiere, Coppee, de Mun,
Lamy, Mezieres, Duc de Broglie, Rene Bazin, Comte
d'Haussonville, and Thureau-Dangin. The entire number of members
of the French Academy from 1634 to 1906 has been 500. Of these
fourteen were cardinals, nine archbishops, and twenty-five
bishops; three belonged to reigning families: Comte de Clermont,
Lucien Bonaparte and Duc d'Aumale: one member, A. Thiers, was
President of the French Republic; fifteen were prime ministers;
forty-nine, ministers; thirty-six, ambassadors; twenty, dukes
and peers; six, grandees of Spain; thirty-nine, knights of the
orders of the King, of the Holy Ghost, or of St. Louis, eleven,
Knights of the Golden Fleece; and thirty, grand cross of the
Legion of Honour. Twenty-four members were elected to the French
Academy before they were twenty-three years of age; twenty-three
were at least seventy years of age before their reception took
place; fifteen died before reaching the age of forty-five;
eighteen were about ninety years old when they died and two
lived to be almost centenarians.
The Dictionary
The object for which the Academy was founded as set forth in its
statutes, was the purification of the French language. To attain
this end it proposed to compile a dictionary, a grammar, a
treatise on rhetoric, and a treatise on poetics. Only the
dictionary has been carried out. From 1694 to 1878 seven
editions of this work were published. The office of the Academy
is not to create but to register words approved by the authority
of the best writers and by good society. The dictionary is
prepared by six members named for life, who are assisted by the
perpetual secretary. Each word is submitted by the chairman of
this committee to the Academy for approval. Besides this
dictionary, the French Academy, at the suggestion of Voltaire,
in 1778, began an "Historical Dictionary of the French
Language", which, however, never progressed beyond the letter A.
This undertaking was abandoned some twenty years ago. Every year
the Academy awards a number of prizes. Previous to 1780 only two
prizes were distributed. Since that period legacies and
donations have provided an annual sum of more than 200,000
francs for the "Prix de Vertu", and the literary prizes. Some
prizes for prose and poetry are given after competition. The
"Prix Monthyon" (for literature, 19,000 francs), the "Prix
Therouanne" (for historical works, 4,000 francs), the "Prix
Marcellin Guerin" (for literary works, 5,000 francs), and the
"Prix Gobert" (for French history, 10,000 francs), are the most
important. The "Prix de Vertu", of which the first was
established by M. de Monthyon in 1784, are given to poor persons
who have accomplished some remarkable act of charity or courage.
Many of these have gone to missionaries and sisters belonging to
various religious orders.
History
At first the Academicians held their sessions at the house of
Conrart, then at that of S guier, after whose death Louis XIV
placed a large room at their disposal, with ample provision for
clerks, copyists, and servants. In 1793 the Convention
suppressed the French Academy, also the Academy of Inscriptions
and Belles Lettres the Academy of Sciences, the Academy of
Painting and Sculpture, and the Academy of Architecture. They
were reestablished in 1795, under the name of a National
Institute, composed of three sections: the first comprising the
sciences of physics and mathematics; the second, the moral and
political sciences; the third, literature and the fine arts.
From that period dates the uniform which is still worn by the
members of the institute at public ceremonials and other solemn
functions. It consists of a long coat, the collar and the lapels
of which are embroidered in green, a cocked hat trimmed with
black feathers, and adorned with a tricoloured cockade, and
dress sword with a hilt of mother-of-pearl and gold. Bonaparte,
after his election as First Consul, gave a new organization to
the Institute, which henceforth was to be composed of four
sections, the first being a section of sciences, corresponding
to the former Academy of Science; the second that of French
Language and Literature, corresponding to the former French
Academy; the third, that of History and Ancient Literature,
corresponding to the Academy of Inscriptions; and the fourth,
that of Fine Arts, corresponding to the former Academy of Fine
Arts. In 1806 Napoleon I granted to the Institute the College of
the Four Nations. Here the Academy holds its sessions, and here
are its offices and library. This building received the name of
Palace of the Institute. Louis XVIII officially reestablished
the name of Academy. Louis Philippe added a fifth section to the
Institute under the name of Academy of Moral and Political
Sciences. Since then no modifications have been made in the
organization of the Institute. It therefore includes at present:
(1) The French Academy; (2) The Academy of Fine Arts; (3) The
Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres; (4) The Academy of
Sciences; (.5) The Academy of Moral and Political Sciences. What
has been the influence of the French Academy? Some critics have
reproached it with a tendency to hamper and crush originality.
But it is the general opinion of scholars that it has corrected
the judgment, purified the taste, and formed the language of
French writers. Matthew Arnold, in his essay on "The Literary
Influence of the Academies", praised it as a high court of
letters and a rallying point for educated opinion. To it he
ascribed the most, striking characteristics of the French
language, its purity, delicacy, and flexibility.
Academy of Fine Arts
The Academy of Fine Arts replaced, in 1795, the Academy of
Painting and Sculpture founded by Louis XIV in 1648, and the
Academy of Architecture founded in 1675. It was reorganized 23
January, 1803, and again 21 March, 1816. It is now composed of
forty members: fourteen painters, eight sculptors, eight
architects, four engravers, and six musical composers. There
are, besides, ten honorary members, forty corresponding members,
and ten honorary corresponding members. From among the members
are chosen the Directors of the "Ecole des Beaux Arts", and of
the Villa Medici, the Art Academy of France at Rome, founded by
Colbert in 1666, for young painters, sculptors, architects, and
musicians who, having been chosen by competition, are sent to
Italy for four years to complete their studies at the expense of
the Government.
Academy of Inscriptions and Belle-Lettres
In 1663, at the suggestion of Colbert, Louis XIV appointed a
committee of four members of the French Academy charged with the
duty of furnishing legends and inscriptions for medals. This was
the origin of the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres,
founded in 1701. It was composed of ten honorary members, ten
pensionnaires, ten associates, and ten pupils. The Academy of
Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres deals with the history,
geography, and antiquities of France, with Oriental, Greek, and
Latin antiquities, the history of science among the ancients,
and comparative philology.
Academy of Sciences
The Academy of Sciences was founded in 1666, at the suggestion
of Colbert. At first it dealt only with geometry, astronomy,
mechanics, anatomy, chemistry, and botany. At present it numbers
sixty-six members, divided into eleven sections of six members
each: geometry, mechanics, physics, astronomy, geography and
navigation, chemistry, mineralogy, botany, agriculture, anatomy
and zoology, medicine and surgery. There are, besides, two
perpetual secretaries, ten honorary members, eight foreign
members, eight foreign associates, and one hundred French and
foreign corresponding members.
Academy of Moral and Political Sciences
The Academy of Moral and Political Sciences was founded in 1795.
Suppressed by Napoleon in 1803, it was reestablished by Louis
Philippe in 1832. It was then composed of thirty members divided
into five sections: philosophy; morals; legislation, public law,
and Jurisprudence; political economy; general and philosophic
history. Another section was added in 1855: politics,
administration, and finances. In 1872 the number of the members
was fixed at forty, besides ten honorary members, six
associates, and from thirty to forty corresponding members.
Every year on 5 October, the five sections of the Institute hold
a general public session, when prizes awarded by the several
Academies are distributed. In 1877, the Duc d'Aumale left to the
Institute of France by his will the chateau of Chantilly with
its art collections.
HOUSSAYE, The Forum, February, 1876; VINCENT, The French Academy
(Boston, 1901); FUNCK-BRENTANO, Richelieu et l'Academie (Paris,
1904); FABRE, Chapelain et nos deux premieres Academies (Paris,
1890); TASTET, Histoire des guarante fauteuils de l'Academie
franc,aise depuis sa fondation jusqu'-`a nos jours (Paris,
1855); PELISSON-OLIVET, ed. LIVET, Histoire de l'Academie
franc,aise (Paris, 1858); JEANROY-FELIX, Fauteuils contemporains
de l'Academie franc,aise (Paris, 1900); FAGUET, Histoire de la
litterature franc,aise (Paris, 1900), II; PETIT DE JULLEVILLE,
Histoire de la langue et de la litterature franc,aise (Paris,
1897), IV.
JEAN LE BARS
Acadia
Acadia
The precise location and extent of Acadia was a subject of
constant dispute and consequent warfare between the French and
English colonists of America for more than one hundred and fifty
years. When Henry IV of France granted to the Sieur de Monts the
territory of "La Cadie", as it was called, it was "to cultivate,
to cause to be peopled, and to search for gold and silver mines
from the 46th to the 40th degree N. lat. "The Marquise de
Guercheville, who purchased the claim from de Monts, fancied she
owned from Florida to the St. Lawrence. Subsequently it was
considered to be the present peninsula of Nova Scotia, and now
is usually regarded as the small district on the south shore of
the Bay of Fundy from Annapolis to the Basin of Minas. De Monts
received his concession 8 November, 1603. Claims had previously
been laid to the territory by Cartier's nephews; and de la
Roche, Chauvin, and de Chastes had made attempts to found a
colony there; but it had all resulted in nothing. De Monts was a
Calvinist, but Henry enjoined on him to teach Catholicity to the
tribe of Micmacs who inhabited those regions. With de Monts, on
his journey out were Champlain, who was averse to the
settlement, as being too near the English; and also Pontgrave,
the Baron of Poutrincourt. After wandering: about the coast of
Maine, and attempting a settlement on an island which they
called Sainte Croix, they entered the harbour to which Champlain
gave the name of Port Royal, now Annapolis. De Monts' charter
was revoked the following year, and, on withdrawing to France,
he made over Port Royal and surroundings to Poutrincourt. The
colony had great difficulty to maintain itself. Mme. de
Guercheville attempted the work, but, disgusted with her
ill-success, ordered La Saussaye, whom she sent over, to go
somewhere else. Touching at Port Royal, he found its number of
colonists very inconsiderable, and, taking the two Jesuit
priests Biard and Masse, who were there, he with some new
settlers established the colony of St. Sauveur at what is now
Bar Harbor in Maine. Hardly was the work begun when the
notorious pirate Argal of Virginia descended upon it and carried
off the priests and some others, intending to hang them in
Virginia, bidding the rest to withdraw, as they were in what he
declared to be English territory. Returning with three vessels
he utterly destroyed the colony, and then sailing across to Port
Royal destroyed it also. This was in 1613. Haliburton attributes
this raid to the "indigestible malice" of Father Biard, but the
testimony of Champlain to the contrary refutes this accusation.
Poutrincourt returned to France and died in battle. His son,
commonly known as Biencourt, remained with some associates,
among whom was Charles de la Tour, subsequently famous in
Acadian history, and lived with the Indians as coureurs de bois,
waiting for better times.
As it was now considered by the English to be their territory
beyond dispute, a grant of it was made in 1627 to Sir William
Alexander, who, though he never established a colony there, gave
the country the name, which it still retains, of Nova Scotia.
Sir William also received other grants of the most extravagant
extent elsewhere. Meantime, de la Tour's father, Claude, who had
left Acadia and turned traitor to his country, came over in a
vessel furnished by England, having promised the government to
induce his son to yield up the entire territory. This, however,
the son refused to do. Both the de la Tours were Huguenots,
though the younger is said to have later on become a Catholic.
In virtue of the treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye, Acadia became
French territory again in 1632, and Isaac de Razilly was sent
over as Governor. Associated with him were his kinsman
Charnisay, young de la Tour, and Denys, each controlling certain
assigned portions of the country. On the death of Razilly in
1636, these three lieutenants began a fierce war for possession
of the land, and later on a fourth claimant, in the person of Le
Borgne, appeared, with the pretence that the territory of
Charnisay had been mortgaged to him. The struggle was fought
chiefly between de la Tour and Charnisay, both of whom
treacherously appealed to the Puritans of Boston for assistance.
This shameful strife ended in the English again entering into
possession. Oliver Cromwell then ruled England, and de la Tour
crossed the ocean and obtained a commission from the Protector
to govern the colony, one of the stipulations being that no
Catholics should be allowed to settle there. With him were
associated two Englishmen, Crowne and Temple. In 1667 it was
again restored to France by the treaty of Breda, and
Grandfontaine, the new Governor, reported that there were only
400 souls in Acadia, more than three-fourths of whom lived in
and around Port Royal; but it is probable that many had married
Indians and were coureurs de bois. In 1687 the population had
grown to 800. The census of 1714 gives 2,100; of 1737, 7,598; of
1747, about 12,500. After eighty years it had grown to 18,000,
though there was little or no immigration. From 1671 the
inhabitants began to attach themselves to the soil; agriculture
was an almost universal Occupation, and where the population was
remote from Port Royal and unmolested it developed into a
peaceful, prosperous, and moral people. But from the time of the
treaty of Breda till 1712, Port Royal had been besieged no less
than five times. In 1690 it was taken and sacked by Admiral
Phips, Governor de Menneval and his garrison being carried off
as prisoners to Boston; but as Phips was preoccupied with his
projected expedition to Qu bec, he took no steps to secure the
fort and it soon fell into the hands of the French. This whole
period of twenty years was one series of pillage, murder, and
devastation. Finally a supreme effort was made to dislodge the
French. Four expeditions were sent against Port Royal by the
English, under Church, March, Wainwright, and Nicholson. On the
French side were Subercase and de Saint-Castin. Nicholson
finally entered Port Royal, 12 October, 1710, after a siege of
nineteen days. Since then it is known as Annapolis. Finally, by
the treaty of Utrecht 13 April, 1713, all Acadia was ceded to
England, The French inhabitants then determined to leave the
country, and their kindred at Cape Breton and Prince Edward's
Island endeavoured to have them migrate in their direction. This
the English Governor opposed, although Queen Anne had commanded
him to let them withdraw; but, as she died shortly afterwards,
Nicholson had his way, and the Acadians took the oath of
allegiance to King George, with the clause, however, that they
should not be bound to take arms against the French or their
Indian allies. In 1720, General Philipps, then Governor, ordered
them to take the oath without reserve, or to withdraw inside of
four months; whereupon they prepared to emigrate with their
property, but were again prevented. Now began the plot to deport
them. The purpose was not to permit them to go to Canada or
elsewhere among the French, but to colonize them among the
English, "in order to make them true Englishmen", and get them
to change their faith, as is evident from a letter of Craggs,
the Secretary of State, to the Governor. The deportation was
already settled for that spring, but it did not take place till
long years afterwards. During forty years they refused to be
cajoled or threatened into taking the complete oath of
allegiance. They admitted only an oath of fealty, and were known
as the "French Neutrals". So loyal were they that, when in 1742
the French under Duvivier invaded Acadia, they gave him no
assistance, continuing the same course of action during four
successive years, even when the French troops under de Ramesay
were at the walls of Annapolis, all of which is proved by State
documents. In 1745-46 Governor Shirley did his utmost to make
them apostatize, and proposed "to drive all Romish priests out
of the Province and introduce English schools and French
Protestant ministers". In 1749 an oath without restriction was
exacted by Cornwallis, but refused by the whole population, and
in 1750 they asked again to quit the country. Finally, when the
French made their last stand at Fort Beausejour, north of the
Bay of Fundy, the Acadians gave them no assistance, except 300
who were forced under threat of death. Beausejour surrendered 16
June, 1755. After the fall of Beausejour, which was due to the
treachery of its French occupants, began the famous deportation
of these peaceful peasants, who for forty years had been
faithful to the English Government. It is the subject of
Longfellow's "Evangeline". They were torn from their homes, in
what Bancroft calls "the appalling cold of December", and rudely
thrust without money or provisions into the holds of ships;
parents separated from their children, husbands from their
wives, and cast everywhere along the coast from Massachusetts to
Georgia, some wandering over to their compatriots in Louisiana,
some to Guianas and the West Indies, and others reaching France.
As to the number of victims, some writers put it as low as
8,000, others, who are very reliable, rating it at 18,000. The
mortality attending this act of cruelty was very great,
particularly among the children. All the farms, cattle, and
houses were confiscated and handed over to the English colonists
who took their place. After a while many of the Acadians
wandered back to their old homes, and finally came in such
numbers that on 10 September, 1855, they celebrated in Nova
Scotia, New Brunswick, Cape Breton, and Prince Edward's Island
the centenary of their dispersion. According to Richard in his
"Acadia" (II, 342), there are no fewer than 270,000 descendants
of the Acadians living today; 130,000 in the Maritime Provinces,
100,000 in French Canada, and 40,000 in Louisiana.
Jesuit Relations (Cleveland, 1896 1901); ROCHEMONTEIX, Les J
suites et la nouvelle France au XVII si cle; MURDOCH, History of
Nova Scotia (1867); RICHARD, Acadia (1894); HALIBURTON, History
of Nova Scotia (Halifax, 1862); PARKMAN, Montcalm and Wolfe
(Boston, 1889, 1902).
T.J. CAMPBELL
Acanthus (Titular See)
Acanthus
A titular see of Macedonia, on the Strymonic Gulf, now known as
Erisso. Its inhabitants were praised by Xerxes for their zeal in
his cause (Herodotus VII, cxxv). There were still extant earlier
in the nineteenth century the ruins of a large curving mole
built far into the sea.
SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr. (London, 1887) I, 8;
LEAKE, Travels in Northern Greece (London, 1835), III, 147.
Acanthus (Plant)
Acanthus
A plant, indigenous to middle Europe, the leaf of which has
served in all ages as an ornament, or for ornamentation. There
are two varieties, one wild and thorny, and one with soft
branches without spines. The acanthus appears for the first time
in the arts in ancient Greece. It was chosen for decorative
purposes because of the beauty of its leaves, as well as for its
abundance on Greek soil. At first it was taken directly from
nature. Greek sculpture rendered it with truthful expression,
whether of the soft or the spiky variety, showing the character,
texture, and model of the leaf. During the fifth century B.C.
the acanthus ornament took an important place especially in
architecture, and was the principal ornament of the Corinthian
capital. From the conquest of Alexander in the East can be
traced the transformation of the acanthus that is found in later
Eastern art.
THOMAS H. POOLE
Acathistus (Akathistos)
Acathistus
(Greek akathistos; a privative, kathizo "sit"; i.e. not sitting;
standing).
The title of a certain hymn -- or, better, an Office in the
Greek Liturgy -- in honour of the Mother of God. The title is
one of eminence; since, while in other similar hymns the people
are permitted to sit during part of the time, this hymn is
partly read, partly sung, all standing (or, perhaps, standing
all night). The word is employed sometimes to indicate the day
on which the hymn is said (i.e. the Saturday of the fifth week
of Lent), as on that day it must be said by clergy and laity
alike, "none ceasing from the divine praises", as the long
historical Lesson of the Office remarks. It is proper to note in
this connection that, while the whole Office is to be said on
this day, portions of it are distributed over the first four
Saturdays of Lent. When recited entire, it is divided into four
parts or stations, between which various Psalms and Canticles
may be sung sitting. Francis Junius wrongly interpreted
Acathistus as one who neither sits nor rests, but journeys with
child; as for instance when the Blessed Virgin was brought by
Joseph to Bethlehem. Gretser [Commentarius in Codin. Curop.
(Bonn, 1839), 321] easily refutes the interpretation by citing
from the Lesson in the Triodion. The origin of the feast is
assigned by the Lesson to the year 626, when Constantinople, in
the reign of Heraclius, was attacked by the Persians and
Scythians but saved through the intervention of the Mother of
God. A sudden hurricane dispersed the fleet of the enemy,
casting the vessels on the shore near the great church of the
Deipara (Mother of God) at Blachernae, a quarter of
Constantinople near the Golden Horn. The people spent the whole
night, says the Lesson, thanking her for the unexpected
deliverance. "From that time, therefore, the Church, in memory
of so great and so divine a miracle, desired this day to be a
feast in honour of the Mother of God . . . and called it
Acathistus" (Lesson). This origin is disputed by Sophocles
(Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods, s. v.) on the
ground that the hymn could not have been composed in one day,
while on the other hand its twenty-four oikoi contain no
allusion to such an event and therefore could scarcely have been
originally composed to commemorate it. Perhaps the kontakion,
which might seem to be allusive, was originally composed for the
celebration on the night of the victory. However the feast may
have originated, the Lesson commemorates two other victories,
under Leo the Isaurian, and Constantine Pogonatus, similarly
ascribed to the intervention of the Deipara.
No certain ascription of its authorship can be made. It has been
attributed to Sergius, Patriarch of Constantinople, whose pious
activities the Lesson commemorates in great detail. Quercius
(P.G., XCII, 1333 sqq.) assigns it to Georgios Pisides, deacon,
archivist, and sacristan of Saint-Sophia whose poems find an
echo both in style and in theme in the Acathistus; the elegance,
antithetic and balanced style, the vividness of the narrative,
the flowers of poetic imagery being all very suggestive of his
work. His position as sacristan would naturally suggest such a
tribute to Our Lady, as the hymn only gives more elaborately the
sentiments condensed into two epigrams of Pisides found in her
church at Blachernae. Quercius also argues that words, phrases,
and sentences of the hymn are to be found in the poetry of
Pisides. Leclercq (in Cabrol, Dict. d'archeol. chret. et de
liturgie, s.v. "Acathistus") finds nothing absolutely
demonstrative in such a comparison and offers a suggestion which
may possibly help to a solution of the problem.
In addition to several Latin versions, it has been translated
into Italian, Ruthenian, Rumanian, Arabic, German, and Russian.
Its very great length precludes anything more than the briefest
summary here. It is prefaced by a troparion, followed by a
kontakion (a short hymnodal summary of the character of the
feast), which is repeated at intervals throughout the hymn. As
this kontakion is the only part of the hymn which may clearly
refer to the victory commemorated, and may have been the only
original text (with repetitions interspersed with psalms, hymns,
etc., already well known to the populace) composed for the
night-celebration, it is translated here:
To thee, O Mother of God, unconquered Empress, do I, thy City freed
from evils, offer thanks for the victories achieved; but do thou, by
thy invincible power, deliver me from every kind of danger; that I
may cry to thee, Hail, maiden Spouse!
The Hymn proper comprises twenty-four oikoi (a word which
Gretser interprets as referring to various churches or temples;
but the Triodion itself indicates its meaning in the rubric,
"The first six oikoi are read, and we stand during their
reading" -- oikos thus clearly referring to a division of the
hymn) or stanzas (which may fairly translate the word -- stanza,
like oikos, having an architectural value). These oikoi are
alternately longer and shorter, and their initial letters form a
Greek abecedary. The last (a shorter) one, beginning with the
letter omega, reads:
O Mother, worthy of all hymn-tributes, who didst bring forth the
Word, Most Holy of all the holy, accept the present offering,
deliver all from every evil, and save from future suffering all who
cry to thee. Alleluia.
This Alleluia follows each one of the shorter stanzas. The
longer ones begin with a sentence of about the same length,
which skilfully leads up to a series of salutations beginning
with "Hail." All of these longer stanzas, except the first
(which has fourteen) comprise thirteen such sentences, including
the last, which, as a sort of refrain, is always "Hail, maiden
Spouse!" The first stanza narrates the mission of Gabriel to
Mary; and his astonishment at the condescension of the Almighty
is so great that he bursts forth into:
Hail, through whom joy shall shine forth!
Hail, through whom evil shall end!
Hail, restorer of fallen Adam!
Hail, redemption of Eve's tears!
etc. The second stanza gives the questioning of Mary; the third
continues it and gives the answer of Gabriel; the fourth
narrates the Incarnation; the fifth the visit to Elizabeth, with
a series of "Hails" prettily conceived as being translations
into words of the joyful leapings of the Baptist; the sixth,
Joseph's trouble of mind; the seventh, the coming of the
shepherds, who begin their "Hail" very appropriately:
Hail, Mother of the Lamb and of the Shepherd!
Hail, Sheepfold of rational sheep!
In the ninth stanza the Magi, startled, cry out in joy:
Hail, Mother of the unwestering Star!
Hail, Splendour of the mystic Day!
In the tenth the Magi return home to announce Alleluia; the
eleventh has appropriate allusions to the Flight into Egypt:
Hail, Sea that didst overwhelm the wise Pharaoh!
Hail, Rock that gavest life to the thirsty!
-- with other references to the cloud, the pillar of fire, the
manna, etc. The twelfth and thirteenth deal with Simeon; the
fourteenth and twenty-second are more general in character; the
twenty-third perhaps consciously borrows imagery from the
Blachernian Church of the Deipara and perhaps also alludes
distantly to the victory (or to the three victories)
commemorated in the Lesson:
Hail, Tabernacle of God and the Word!
Hail, unshaken Tower of the Church!
Hail, inexpugnable Wall!
Hail, through whom trophies are lifted up!
Hail, through whom enemies fall down!
Hail, healing of my body!
Hail, safety of my soul!
P.G., XCII, has the works of Pisides and the Acathistus with
much comment; SOPHOCLES, Greek Lexicon, etc., has an interesting
note; LECLERCQ, in Dict. d arch ol. chr t. et de lit., gives an
extensive bibliography.
H.T. HENRY
St. Acca
St. Acca
Bishop of Hexham, and patron of learning (c. 660-742). Acca was
a Northumbrian by birth and began life in the household of a
certain Bosa, who afterwards became Bishop of York. After a few
years, however, Acca attached himself to St. Wilfrid and
remained his devoted disciple and companion in all his troubles.
He may have joined Wilfrid as early as 678, and he certainly was
with him at the time of his second journey to Rome in 692. On
their return to England, when Wilfrid was reinstated at Hexham,
he made Acca abbot of St. Andrew's monastery there; and after
Wilfrid's death (709) Acca succeeded him as bishop. The work of
completing and adorning the churches left unfinished by St.
Wilfrid was energetically carried on by his successor. In ruling
the diocese and in conducting the services of the Church, Acca
was equally zealous. He brought to the North a famous cantor
named Maban, who had learned in Kent the Roman traditions of
psalmody handed down from St. Gregory the Great through St.
Augustine. He was famed also for his theological learning, and
for his encouragement of students by every means in his power.
It was at Acca's instigation that Eddius undertook the Life of
St. Wilfrid, and above all, it was to the same kind friend and
patron that Bede dedicated several of his most important works,
especially those dealing with Holy Scripture. For some
unexplained reason Acca was driven from his diocese in 732. He
is believed to have retired to Withern in Galloway, but he
returned to Hexham before his death in 742, when he was at once
revered as a Saint. Two crosses of exquisite workmanship, one of
which is still preserved in a fragmentary state, were erected at
the head and foot of his grave. When the body of the Saint was
translated, the vestments were found entire, and the accounts of
his miracles were drawn up by St. AElred and by Simeon of
Durham. Of any true liturgical cultus there is little trace, but
his feast is said to have been kept on 20 October. There is also
mention of 19 February, which may have been the date of some
translation of his relics.
The only writing of Acca's which we possess is a letter
addressed to St. Bede and printed in his works. This document,
together with much other material relating to Acca, has also
been printed in RAINE'S Priory of Hexham (London, 1864), Surtees
Society, 1864. Our knowledge of Acca's life is derived primarily
from BEDE, EDDIUS, SIMEON OF DURHAM, RICHARD OF DURHAM, and
AELRED. Adequate accounts may be also found in STANTON'S English
Menology (London, 1892), 507; Dict. of Nat. Biog,; Dict. of
Christ. Biog. For some archaeological sidelights, cf. BROWNE
(Anglican Bishop), Theodore and Wilfrith (London, 1897).
HERBERT THURSTON
Accaron
Accaron
( Ekron).
The most northern of the five principal Philistine cities (Jos.
xiii, 3; xv, 11, 46). We do not know whether it was founded by
the Philistines or the Hevites. It was first given to the tribe
of Juda (Jos., xv, 11, 45) and then to Dan (Jos., xix, 43). Juda
conquered it for a time (Judg., i, 18), but it fell again into
the hands of the Philistines, who brought here the captive ark
of the covenant after it had passed through Azotus and Geth (I
K., v, 10). It came near being reconquered by Israel after the
defeat of Goliath (I K., vii, 14). The city possessed a famous
sanctuary of Beelzebub (IV Ii., i, 2, 3, 6 16), and was often
denounced by the prophets (Jer., xxv, 20; Am., i, 8; Soph., ii,
4; Zach., ix, 5). King Alexander Bales gave the city to Jonathan
Machabeus (I Mach., x, 89). Robinson identified it with the
village Akir, a station on the railway from Jaffa to Jerusalem.
HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); GUERIN in Dict. de la
Bible (Paris, 1895).
A.J. MAAS
Accentus Ecclesiasticus
Accentus Ecclesiasticus
The counterpart of concentus. In the ancient Church music all
that portion of the liturgical song which was performed by the
entire choir, or by sections of it, say two or three singers,
was called concentus. Thus hymns, psalms, and alleluias were,
generally speaking, included under the term concentus. On the
other hand. such parts of the liturgy as the priest, or the
deacon, or subdeacon, or the acolyte sang alone were called
accentus; such were the Collects, the Epistle and Gospel, the
Preface, in short anything which was recited chiefly on one
tone, rather than sung, by the priest or one of his assistants.
The accentus should never be accompanied by harmonies, whether
of voices or of instruments, although the concentus may receive
an accompaniment. The words Gloria in excelsis Deo and Credo in
Unum Deum, being assigned to the celebrant, should not be
repeated by the choir or accompanied by the organ or other
musical instrument.
J.A. VOeLKER
Acceptance
Acceptance
Acceptance, in canon law, the act by which one receives a thing
with approbation or satisfaction. The collation of a benefice is
not complete till it has been accepted by him on whom it has
been conferred. Acceptance is the link between the benefice and
the benefited. It is therefore necessary to accept the benefice,
to have jus in re; till the acceptance, there is at most a jus
ad rem. (See RIGHT.) Acceptance is needed for the validity of an
election. If the person chosen be absent, a specified time may
be given for acceptance, and a further time may be allowed to
obtain the confirmation of the election to an office.
Acceptance is of the essence of a gift, which, in law, means a
gratuitous transfer of property. Delivery of personal property
with words of gift suffices; if delivery is not made, a deed or
writing under seal should be executed and delivered. For the
transfer of real property, a deed is generally necessary. In all
cases acceptance is necessary to make the transfer binding in
law. Acceptance of a law is not necessary to impose the
obligation of submission. Even in a democracy, where the
organized people may, or should, take part in the preparation
and making of the laws, it may not refuse to accept and to obey
the laws when made and promulgated. Otherwise the legislative
authority would be a mockery, and all governmental power would
vanish. We are not now posing the question whether an unjust law
is binding; nor are we discussing how far either custom or
desuetude may take away the binding force of a law; both may
imply the assent of the lawmaking power. Acceptance by the
faithful is not required for the binding force of ecclesiastical
laws. The Apostles received from Christ the power of binding and
loosing, and the hierarchy (i.e. the Pope, bishops and other
prelates) have inherited this power, as has always been
recognized in the Church. In the Catholic Church the lawmaking
power established by Christ will ever have the authority to make
laws previous to, and independent of, the acceptance of the
faithful. If bishops or other prelates should enact a law
contrary to the canons, there is the remedy or an appeal to the
highest authority of the Church for its annulment. Wyclif
attacked this authority when he proclaimed, in the fifteenth
thesis condemned by the Council of Constance and Martin V, that
"no one was a temporal prince, or prelate, or bishop, who was in
mortal sin." Huss (ibid., Prop. 30) declared that
"ecclesiastical obedience was an invention of the priests of the
Church, and outside the authority of Scripture." Luther, in the
proposition condemned (1521) by the University of Paris, taught
that neither pope nor bishop nor any one among men has the right
to impose on a Christian a single syllable without his full
acceptance; anything otherwise done is in the spirit of tyranny.
The Jansenists favoured the theory that the authority of the
bishops and Pope was representative of the will of the whole
body of the Church; hence Clement Xl, in 1713, condemned the
90th proposition of Quesnel: "The Church has the power to
excommunicate, to be used by the chief pastor, with the (at
least presumed) consent of the whole body." Against a natural or
divine law, no custom or desuetude can avail for the cessation
of obligation. From a merely ecclesiastical law either custom or
desuetude may withdraw the obligation, wherever they may
properly imply the assent of the lawmaking power in the Church.
(See LAW, CUSTOM.)
D'AVINO, Enc. dell' Ecclesiastico (Turin, 1878); ANDRE-WAGNER,
Dict. de droit can. (3d ed., Paris, 1901); DIDIOT in Dict. de
theol. cath. (Paris, 1903), s.v.
R.L. BURTSELL
Acceptants
Acceptants
Those Jansenists who accepted without any reserve or mental
restriction the Bull Unigenitus, issued in 1713 against the
Jansenist doctrines as set forth in the Reflexions morales sur
le Nouveau Testament of the Oratorian, Pasquier Quesnel. As is
well known, the error of Jansenius gave rise to two conflicts in
the Church: the first, early in the second half of the
seventeenth century, centred about his book Augustinus, and
ceased with the Pax Clementina, also called the paix fourree or
False Peace (l669); the second, which began with the eighteenth
century, was waged around the above-mentioned work of Quesnel.
The peace too hastily granted by Clement IX was favourable to
Jansenism. The doctrine took deep root in the French Parliaments
and affected several religious orders, Benedictines, Fathers of
Christian Doctrine, Genevievans, and especially Oratorians.
Attention was called to the spread of the heresy by the success
of the Reflexions morales. This work, published as a small
volume in 1671 with the approval of Vialart, Bishop of
Chalons-sur-Marne, had been steadily enlarged in succeeding
editions until, in 1693, it numbered four compact volumes
bearing always the approbation of Vialart, who died in 1680. De
Noailles, the new Bishop of Chalons, sanctioned the work in
1695, but the following year, as Archbishop of Paris, he
condemned it. The edition of 1699 was published without the
changes demanded by Bossuet, without the preface which he
composed for it, and without the approval of the diocesan
bishop. The following year (2 July, 1700) the anonymous work
Probleme ecclesiastique, etc., and the controversies to which it
gave rise, again drew attention to the peril of Jansenism. At
the Assembly of the French Clergy, in the same year, Bossuet
brought about the condemnation of four Jansenist propositions
and of 127 others of lax morality. After the death of Bossuet
(1704), Fenelon led the contest against Jansenism and especially
against the distinction between "fact" and "right" ( fait et
droit). Finally, at the request of Louis XIV, and following the
example of his predecessors, Clement XI condemned in the Bull
Vineam Domini (17()5) the Jansenist evasion known as silentium
obsequiosum, or respectful silence, and proscribed (1708) the
Reflexions morales. Shortly afterwards, the King caused the
Jansenist establishment of Port-Royal to be demolished (1710).
Jansenism, however, had not yet been overthrown. Louis XIV then
urged the Pope (November, 1711) to publish another Bull, and
promised to have it accepted with due respect by the French
bishops. On this assurance Clement XI established a special
congregation to draw up the new constitution. After eighteen
months of careful study, the famous Bull Unigenitus, destined
soon to provoke an outburst of wrath on the part of the
Jansenists, was promulgated in Rome (8 September, 1713). In it
the Pope condemned 101 propositions from Quesnel's book as
"false, misleading, scandalous, suspected and savouring of
heresy, bordering upon heresy, frequently condemned; what is
more, as being heretical and reviving various propositions of
Jansenius, in the very sense for which they were first
proscribed." Noailles at first submitted, but later, in an
assembly of forty-nine bishops, who met at the instance of
Fenelon in the archiepiscopal palace in Paris, he recalled his
submission and with eight of his colleagues ranged himself among
the appelants. The forty others voted to accept. The Parliament
of Paris registered the Bull (15 February, 1714), and the
Sorbonne did the same, albeit under pressure of royal authority.
The French Episcopate, with the exception of twenty hesitating
or stubborn members, submitted forthwith. To make an end of the
matter, Louis XIV, at Fenelon's suggestion, conceived the idea
of holding a national council as a means of restoring unity; but
his death prevented this and deferred the hour of final
pacification.
The Regent, Philip of Orleans, a man without religious or moral
convictions, a "vicious braggart", as Louis XIV styled him}
attempted to hold the balance between the two parties. The
Jansenists profited by his neutrality. Noailles was put at the
head of a "conseil de conscience pour les affaires
ecclesiastiques", and four doctors of the Sorbonne who had been
exiled because of their violent opposition to the Bull were
recalled. The Sorbonne, which had accepted the Bull Unigenitus
by a mere majority, now cancelled its acceptance (1716). The
Pope through a Brief punished the Sorbonne by depriving it of
all its privileges. The Parliament of Paris sided with the
Faculty and suppressed the Brief, while the Sorbonne itself
contested the right of the Sovereign Pontiff to withdraw
lawfully granted privileges. The following year four bishops,
Soanen of Senez, Colbert of Montpellier, de la Broue of
Mirepoix, and de Langle of Boulogne, appealed from the Bull
Unigenitus to a future general council. Their example was
followed by sixteen bishops, ninety- seven doctors of the
Sorbonne, a number of cures of Paris, Oratorians, Genevievans,
Benedictines of Saint-Maur, Dominicans, members of female
religious orders, and even lay people. This movement extended to
the provinces, but not to the universities, all of which, with
the exception of Nantes and Reims, supported the Papal Bull. Of
the 100,000 priests then in France, hardly 3,000 were among the
appelants, and 700 of these were in Paris. The great majority
voted for acceptance and counted on their side more than 100
bishops. The appelants had only 20 bishops. Clement XI knew that
he must act vigorously. He had used every means of persuasion
and had written to the Archbishop of Paris beseeching him to set
the example of submission. He even consented to a delay. But the
opposition was unyielding. It was then that the Pope published
the Bull Pastoralis Officii (28 August, 1718), in which he
pronounced excommunication upon all who opposed the Bull
Unigenitus. The same year, 2 October, Noailles and his party
appealed from this second Bull, and the Faculties of the
University of Paris, headed by the famous Rollin, endorsed the
appeal. The Regent thought it time to intervene. He was
indifferent to the question of doctrine, but was politic enough
to see that censorious people like the appelants were no less
dangerous to the State than to the Church. Moreover, his old
teacher, the Abbe Dubois, now his Prime Minister, with an eye
perhaps to the cardinal's hat, was in favour of peace. He caused
to be composed a Corps de Doctrine (1720) explaining the Bull
Unigenitus, and about one hundred prelates gave their adhesion
to it. Noailles then accepted the Bull (19 November, 1720),
"following the explanations which have been approved of by a
great number of French bishops." This ambiguous and uncertain
submission did not satisfy Clement XI; he died, however, without
having obtained anything more definite.
Louis XV and his aged minister, the Cardinal de Fleury, opposed
the sect with vigour. Authorized by them, De Tencin, Archbishop
of Embrun, convoked a provincial council (1727) to examine
Soanen, the aged Bishop of Senez, who in a pastoral instruction
had gone to extremes. Many bishops took part in this council,
notably De Belzunce, famous for the zeal he displayed during the
plague of Marseilles. Although supported by twelve bishops and
fifty advocates, Soanen was suspended and sent to the monastery
of Chaise-Dieu where he died, insubordinate, at the age of
ninety-three. After numerous evasions, ending in submission,
Noailles died in 1729. The only appelants left were the Bishops
Colbert of Montpellier, Caylus of Auxerre, and Bossuet of
Troyes, a nephew of the great Bishop of Meaux. At the same time
700 doctors of the Sorbonne, of whom thirty-nine were bishops,
ratified the earlier (1714) acceptance of the Bull Unigenitus.
It was a triumph for the acceptants, that is to say, for the
authority of the Pope and of the Church.
LAFITAU, Histoire de la Constitution Unigenitus (Avignon, 1757);
SAINT-SIMON, Memoires (prejudiced and untrustworthy); JAGER,
Hist. de l'Eglise catholique en France (1862-68); SCHILL, Die
Konstitution Unigenitus (Freiburg, 1876); BOWER, History of the
Roman Popes, XC, 233 sqq.; BARTHELEMY, Le Cardinal de Noailles
(Paris, 1888); LE ROY, La France et Rome de 1700 a 1715 (Paris,
1892); DE CROUSAZ-CASTET, L'Eglise et l'Etat au XVIIIe siecle
(Paris 1893); THUILIER, La seconde phase du Jansenisme (Paris
1901), BLIARD, Dubois, cardinal et ministre (Paris, 1902);
THENON, L'Eglise au XVIIIe siecle, in LAVISSE AND RAMBAUD,
L'Histoire de France (Paris, 1893 97); DE LACOMBE, L'opposition
religieuse au debut du XVIIIe siecle, in Le Correspondant, 10
April, 1904.
A. FOURNET
Accession
Accession
(From Lat. accedere, to go to; hence, to be added to).
Accession is a method of acquiring ownership of a thing arising
from the fact that it is in some way added to, or is the fruit
of something already belonging to oneself. This may happen in
three ways: (1) naturally; (2) artificially; (3) from the
combined operation of nature and industry.
(1) Natural
The increase of an animal, the yield of fields, the rent of a
house, etc., belong to the owner of the animal fields, and
house, respectively. Thus, the offspring of a female animal is
the property of her owner, even though it be the result of
intercourse with a male belonging to someone else. The axiom
applies in the case that partus sequitur ventrem. The Louisiana
Code, in accordance with the Roman law, provided that the issue
of slaves though born during the temporary use or hiring of
their mothers, belonged not to the hirer but to the permanent
owner. But the offspring of a slave born during a tenancy for
life belonged to the tenant for life. In the same division is
the species of accession due to alluvion. This is an addition to
one's land made by the action of water, as by the current of a
river. If this increase is gradual and imperceptible, the
augmentation belongs to the owner of the land. If it has been
sudden and in large quantity, by the common law it belongs to
the State.
(2) Artificial
This sort occurs (a) by specification, when one's labour or
artistic talent is employed upon materials owned by another, so
that a new substance or thing is produced. Where this is done in
good faith, the product belongs to the artist or labourer with
the obligation on his part of indemnifying the owner of the
materials. (b) By adjunction, when one's labour and material
have been so united with the property of another that they
cannot be separated. The resultant then belongs to him who has
contributed the more important component. (c) By blending, when
materials of equal value appertaining to different owners, are
mixed together. The thing or its price is then to be divided
according to natural equity between the original possessors, if
the mixture has been made in good faith; otherwise the weight of
law is thrown in his favour whose right has been violated.
(3) Mixed
An example of the third kind of accession is the building of a
house on another's ground, or the planting of trees or sowing of
vegetables in another s field. The house, trees, etc., belong to
the master of the soil after making suitable compensation to the
builder, planter, etc.
BOUVIER, Law Dictionary; SABETTI, Theol. Moralis.
JOSEPH F. DELANY
Accessus
Accessus
A term applied to the voting in conclave for the election of a
pope, by which a cardinal changes his vote and accedes to some
other candidate. When the votes of the cardinals have been
counted after the first balloting and the two-thirds majority
has fallen to none of those voted for, at the following vote
opportunity is granted for a cardinal to change his vote, by
writing, Accedo domino Cardinali, mentioning some one of those
who have been voted for, but not the cardinal for whom he has
already voted. If he should not wish to change his vote, the
cardinal can vote Nemini, i.e. for no one. If these
supplementary votes of accession, added to those a candidate has
received, equal two-thirds of the total vote, then there is an
election. If not, the ballots are burned, and the usual ballot
takes place the next day. ( See CONCLAVE.)
LUCIUS LECTOR, Le Conclave, origine, histoire, etc. (Paris,
1894); LAURENTIUS, inst. Jur. Eccl. (Freiburg, 1905) n. 126.
JOHN J. A' BECKET
Acciajuoli
Acciajuoli
Name of three cardinals belonging to an illustrious Florentine
family of this name.
ANGELO, noted for his learning, experience, and integrity, b.
1349; d. at Pisa, 31 May, 1408. He was made Archbishop of
Florence in 1383, and Cardinal in 1385 by Pope Urban VI. He
resisted all endeavours that were made to bring him over to the
antipope, Clement VII, and defended by word and deed the
regularity of the election of Urban VI. After this Pope's death,
half the votes in the succeeding conclave were for Acciajuoli;
but to end the schism, he directed the election towards Boniface
IX. The new Pope made him Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia, and sent him
to Germany, Slavonia, and Bulgaria to settle difficulties there.
He afterwards became Governor of Naples, and guardian of the
young King Ladislaus, whom he brought to Naples, and some time
later accompanied on his march into Hungary. On his return he
reconciled the Pope with the Orsini, and reformed the
Benedictine monastery of St. Paul in Rome. He died on his way to
Pisa, and was buried in Florence, at the Certosa, a monastic
foundation of his family.
NICCOLO, b. at Florence, 1630; d. in Rome, 23 February, 1719, as
Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia, in his eighty-ninth year.
FILIPPO, b. in Rome, 12 March, 1700. He was nuncio in Portugal,
but was expelled with military force by Pombal (August, 1760)
because of his interference in behalf of the Jesuits. Clement
XIII made him Cardinal in 1759; he died at Ancona, as Bishop of
that see, 4 July, 1766 (Duhr, Pombal, 1891, 121 sqq.).
JOHN J. A' BECKET
Accident
Accident
[Latin accidere, to happen what happens to be in a subject; any
contingent, or nonessential attribute].
I. The obvious division of things into the stable and the
unstable, the more or less independently subsistent and the
dependent, or essentially inherent, appears beset with obscurity
and difficulty as soon as it is brought under reflective
consideration. In their endeavour to solve the problem,
philosophers have followed two extreme tendencies. Some have
denied the objectivity of the substantial or noumenal element,
and attributed it wholly or in part to the mind; others have
made the phenomenal or accidental element subjective, and
accorded objectivity to substance alone. These two extreme
tendencies are represented among the ancient Greek materialists
and atomists on the one hand and the Eleatic pantheists on the
other. Aristotle and his medieval followers steer a middle
course. They hold to the objectivity both of substance and of
accident, though they recognize the subjective factor in the
mode of perception. They use the term accident to designate any
contingent (i.e. nonessential) relation between an attribute and
its subject. As such it is a merely logical denomination, one of
the five predicables or universals, modes of systematic
classification genus, difference, species, property, accident.
In this sense it is called predicable, as distinguished from
predicamental, accident, the latter term standing for a real
objective form or status of things, and denoting a being whose
essential nature it is to inhere in another as in a subject.
Accident thus implies inexistence in substance i.e. not as the
contained in the container, not as part in the whole, not as a
being in time or place, not as effect in cause, not as the known
in the knower; but as an inherent entity or mode in a subject
which it determines. Accidents modify or denominate their
subject in various ways, and to these correspond the nine
"Categories":
+ quantity, in virtue whereof material substance has integrant,
positional parts, divisibility, location, impenetrability,
etc.;
+ quality, which modifies substance immediately and
intrinsically, either statically or dynamically, and includes
such inherents of substance as habit, faculty, sense-stimuli,
and figure or shape;
+ relation, the bearing of one substance on another (e.g.
paternity).
These three groups are called intrinsic accidents, to
distinguish them from the remaining six groups -- action,
passion, location, duration, position, habiliment -- which, as
their names sufficiently suggest, are simply extrinsic
denominations accruing to a substance because of its bearings on
some other substance. Quantity and quality, and, in a restricted
sense. relation are said to be absolute accidents, because they
are held to superadd some special form of being to the substance
wherein they reside. For this reason a real, and not a merely
conceptual, distinction between them and their subject is
maintained. Arguments for the physical reality of this
distinction are drawn from experience
+ internal-consciousness attesting that the permanent,
substantial self is subject to constantly-shifting accidental
states -- and
+ external experience, which witnesses to a like permanence of
things beneath the incessantly varying phenomena of nature.
The supernatural order also furnishes an argument in the
theology of the infused virtues which are habits supervening on,
and hence really distinct from, the substance of the natural
mind.
II. With the reaction against scholasticism, led on by
Descartes, a new theory of the accident is devised, or rather
the two extreme views of the Greeks referred to above are
revived. Descartes, making quantity the very essence of matter,
and thought the essence of spirit, denies all real distinction
between substance and accident. While teaching an extreme
dualism in psychology, his definition of substance, as
independent being, gave occasion to Spinoza's monism, and
accidents became still more deeply buried in substance. On the
other hand substance seems at last to disappear with Locke, the
world is resolved into a congeries of qualities ( primary, or
extension, and secondary, or sensible properties). The primary
qualities, however, still retain a foundation in the objective
order, but with Berkeley they become entirely subjectified; only
the soul is allowed a substantial element as the support of
psychical accidents. This element is likewise dissolved in the
philosophy of Hume and the Associationists. Kant considered
accidents to be simply subjective categories of sense and
intellect, forms according to which the mind apprehends and
judges of things -- which things are, and must remain,
unknowable. Spencer retains Kant's unknowable noumenon but
admits phenomena to be its objective aspects or modifications.
III. Several other classifications of accidents are found in the
pertinent treatises. It should be noted that while accidents by
inhesion modify substance, they are witnesses to its nature,
being the medium whereby the mind, through a process of
abstraction and inference, builds its analogical concepts of the
constitution of substances. From this point of view material
accidents are classed as
+ proper sensibles -- the excitants of the individual senses,
colour for sight, sound for hearing, etc. -- and
+ common sensibles -- extension and its modes, size, distance,
etc. -- which stimulate two or more senses, especially touch
and sight.
Through these two groups of accidents, and concomitantly with
their perception, the underlying subject is apperceived.
Substance in its concrete existence, not in its abstract
essence, is said to be an accidental object of sense.
IV. The modern views of accident, so far as they accord to it
any objectivity, are based on the physical theory that all, at
least material, phenomena (light, colour, heat, sound, etc.) are
simply varying forms of motion. In part, the kinetic element in
such phenomena was known to Aristotle and the Scholastics (cf.
St. Thomas, De Anima, III, Lect. ii); but it is only in recent
times that physical experimentation has thrown light on the
correlation of material phenomena as conditioned by degrees of
motion. While all Neo-Scholastic philosophers maintain that
motion alone will not explain the objectivity of extension, some
(e.g. Gutberlet) admit that it accounts for the sensible
qualities (colour, sound, etc.). Haan (Philos. Nat.) frees the
theory of motion from an extreme idealism, but holds that the
theory of the real, formal objectivity of those qualities
affords a more satisfactory explanation of sense-perception. The
majority of Neo-Scholastic writers favour this latter view.
(Pesch, Phil. Nat.)
V. The teaching of Catholic philosophy on the distinct reality
of certain absolute, not purely modal, accidents was occasioned
by the doctrine of the Real Presence of the Body and Blood of
Christ in the Eucharist, though the arguments for the theory are
deduced from natural experience. The same doctrine, however,
suggests the further question, whether such accidents may not be
separable from substance. Reason alone offers no positive
arguments for such separability. The most it can do is to show
that separability involves no inherent contradiction, and hence
no absolute impossibility; the Omnipotence that endows substance
with the power of supporting accidents can, it is claimed,
supply some other means of support. Nor would the accidents thus
separated, and supernaturally supported, lose their character as
accidents, since they would still retain their essential
property, i.e. natural exigence of inhesion. Of course the
intrinsic possibility of such separation depends solely on the
supernatural interference of God, nor may it extend to all
classes of accidents. Thus, e.g., it is absolutely impossible
for vital faculties, or acts, to exist outside their natural
subjects, or principles. Theorists who, like the Cartesians,
deny the objective, distinct entity of all accidents have been
obliged to reconcile this negation with their belief in the Real
Presence by maintaining that the species, or accidents, of bread
and wine do not really remain in the Eucharist, but that after
Consecration God produces on our senses the impressions
corresponding to the natural phenomena. This theory obviously
demands a seemingly unnecessary multiplication of miracles and
has at present few if any serious advocates. (See EUCHARIST.)
JOHN RICKABY, General Metaphysics (New York, 1900); MIVART, On
Truth (London, 1899); McCosh, First Truths (New York, 1894);
MERCIER, Ontologie; NYS, Cosmologie (I.ouvain, 1903), GUTBERLET,
Naturphilosophie, and Ontologie (Munster, 1894); PESCH,
Philosophia Naturalis (Freiburg, 1897).
F.P. SIEGFRIED
Acclamation
Acclamation
(Lat. ad, to, clamare, to cry out).
IN CIVIC LIFE
The word acclamatio (in the plural, acclamationes) was used in
the classical Latin of Republican Rome as a general term for any
manifestation of popular feeling expressed by a shout. At
weddings, funerals, triumphs, etc., these acclamations were
generally limited to certain stereotyped forms. For example,
when the bride was being conducted to her husband's house the
spectators cried: Io Hymen, Hymenaee, or Talasse, or Talassio.
At a triumph there was a general shout of Io Triumphe. An orator
who gained the approbation of his hearers was interrupted with
cries of belle et festive, bene et praeclare, non potest melius,
and the like where we should say "Hear, hear!" Under the Empire
these acclamations took a remarkable development, more
particularly in the circus and in the theatre. At the entrance
of the emperor the audience rose and greeted him with shouts,
which in the time of Nero were reduced to certain prescribed
forms and were sung in rhythm. Moreover, like the guns of a
royal salute, these cries were also prolonged and repeated for a
definite and carefully recorded number of times. The same custom
invaded the senate, and under the later Antonines it would seem
that such collective expressions of feeling as would nowadays be
incorporated in an address of congratulation or a vote of
censure, then took the form of acclamations which must have been
carefully drafted beforehand and were apparently shouted in
chorus by the whole assembly. A long specimen of denunciatory
acclamations which indeed might better be called imprecations,
chanted in the Senate after the assassination of the Emperor
Commodus (192), is preserved by Lampridius. The original
occupies several pages; a few clauses may suffice here:
On every side are statues of the enemy (i.e. Commodus); on every
side statues of the parricide; on every side statues of the
gladiator. Down with the statues of this gladiator and parricide.
Let the slayer of his fellow-citizens be dragged in the dust; let
the statues of the gladiator be dragged at the cart's tail.
More to our present purpose, however, are the favourable
acclamations of the Senate, such as those recorded by Lampridius
at the election of Alexander Severus:
"Alexander Augustus, may the gods keep thee. For thy modesty; for
thy prudence; for thy guilelessness; for thy chastity. From this we
understand what sort of a ruler thou wilt be. For this we welcome
thee. Thou wilt make it appear that the senate chooses its rulers
well. Thou wilt prove that the senate's judgment is of the highest
worth. Alexander Augustus, may the gods keep thee. Let Alexander
Augustus dedicate the temples of the Antonines. Our Caesar, our
Augustus, our Imperator, may the Gods keep thee. Mayest thou live,
mayest thou thrive, mayest thou rule for many years."
It is only from an examination of the few examples preserved to
us that one can arrive at an understanding of the influence
which this institution of acclamations shouted in unison was
likely to exercise upon the early developments of the Christian
liturgy. The general resemblance with certain primitive forms of
litany or ektene is sufficiently striking, but the subject is
obscure and we may content ourselves primarily here with the
acclamations, more properly so called, which had and still have
a recognized place in the ceremonial of consecration of popes,
emperors, kings, bishops, etc., and those also which are
recorded in the acts of certain early councils.
GROWTH OF LITURGICAL ACCLAMATIONS
It seems highly probable that the practices observed in the
election of the Pagan emperors were the prototype of most of the
liturgical acclamations now known to us. In the long account
given by Vopiscus of the election of the Emperor Tacitus (283)
we are told that when Tacitus at first declined the honour in
the senate on the score of his advanced age,
these were the acclamations of the senators, 'Trajan, too, acceded
to the Empire as an old man!' (ten times); 'and Hadrian acceded to
the Empire in his old age' (ten times). . . 'Do you give orders, let
the soldiers fight' (thirty times); 'Severus said: It is the head
that reigns not the feet' (thirty times); 'It is your mind, not your
body, we are electing' (twenty times); 'Tacitus Augustus, may the
Gods keep you.'
Then Tacitus was taken out to the Campus Martius to be presented
to the soldiers and the people.
Whereupon the people acclaimed: 'Most happily may the gods keep
thee, Tacitus', and the rest which it is customary to say.
The slender records which we possess of the ceremonial in other
cases of the election of an emperor make it clear that these
popular acclamations were never discontinued even after the
coronation assumed an ecclesiastical character and was carried
out in church. Thus the official rituals we possess, one of
which dates back to the close of the eighth century, explain how
when the crown has been imposed
the people shout, 'Holy, holy, holy', and 'Glory to God in the
highest and on earth peace', thrice. And if there is a prince to be
crowned as consort of the Empire, the Patriarch takes the second
crown and hands it to the Emperor, and he imposes it, and the two
choirs shout 'Worthy.'
After this followed the imperial acta ( aktologein is the
technical term in Greek for the shouting of these acclamations)
or laudes, as they were called in the West. A sort of litany
consisting of more than a score of verses was chanted by
heralds, while the people repeated each verse once or thrice
after the leaders. In this we find such passages as,
"Many, many, many;
R. "Many years, for many years,
"Long years to you, N. and N., autocrats of the Romans,
R. "Many years to you.
"Long years to you, Servants of the Lord,
R. "Many years to you." etc.
Almost contemporary with these are the acclamations found in our
English Egbert Pontifical (probably compiled before 769) which
with other English MSS. has preserved to us the earliest
detailed account of a coronation in the West. The text is a
little uncertain, but probably should read as follows:
Then let the whole people say three times along with the bishops and
the priests; 'May our King, N., live for ever' ( Vivat Rex N. in
sempiternum). And he shall be confirmed upon the throne of the
kingdom with the blessing of all the people while the great Lords
kiss him, saying: 'For ever. Amen, amen, amen.'
There is also in the Egbertine ritual a sort of litany closely
resembling the imperial acclamations just referred to, and this
may be compared with the elaborate set of laudes, technically so
called, which belong to the time of Charlemagne and have been
printed by Duchesne in his edition of the Liber Pontificalis,
II, 37. In these imperial laudes the words Christus vincit,
Christus regnat, Christus imperat (Christ conquers, Christ
reigns, Christ commands), nearly always find a place. It should
be added that these acclamations or some similar feature have
been retained to this day in the Eastern coronation rituals and
in a few of Western origin, amongst others in that of England.
Thus for the coronation of King Edward VII in 1902 the official
ceremonial gave the following direction:
When the Homage is ended, the drums beat and the trumpets sound, and
all the people shout, crying out: 'God save King Edward!' 'Long live
King Edward!' 'May the King live for ever!'
FOR POPES AND BISHOPS
It was natural that the practice of acclaiming should not be
confined to the person of the sovereign or to the occasion of
his election. Just as we read of the king "wearing his crown"
upon great feasts in certain favoured cities, a ceremony which
seems to have amounted to a sort of secondary coronation, so the
elaborate laudes in honour of the emperor were often repeated on
festivals, especially at the papal Mass. But more than this the
practice of acclaiming the emperor at his election was also
extended to the Pope and in some cases to simple bishops. In the
case of the Pope our testimonies are not very ancient, but the
"Liber Pontificalis" in the eighth century frequently alludes to
the practice, associating the words acclamationes and laudes in
many combinations; while at a somewhat later date we have the
explicit testimony of the "Ordines Romani." In the case of the
coronation of Leo (probably the fourth pope of that name), we
learn that the leaders of the people from each district
acclaimed him with the words: "The Lord Leo Pope, whom St. Peter
has chosen to sit in his see for many years." At the present day
after the Gloria and the Collect of the Mass of the Coronation,
the senior Cardinal Deacon, standing before the Pope enthroned,
chants the words, "Exaudi, Christe" (Hear, O Christ); to which
all present reply "Long life to our Lord Pius who has been
appointed Supreme Pontiff and Universal Pope." This is repeated
three times with some other invocations, and it then expands
into a short litany in which the repetition of each title is
answered by the prayer tu illum adjuva (Do thou help him). This
last feature closely reproduces the laudes of the Middle Ages,
chanted at the coronation of kings. Similar acclamations seem to
have been familiar from very early times at the election of
bishops, though it would probably be going much too far to
represent them as regularly forming part of the ritual. The
classical instance is that recorded by St. Augustine, who
proposed Heraclius to the people of Hippo as his successor.
Thereupon, he says,
The people shouted: 'Thanks be to God, Praised be Christ.' This was
said twenty-three times. 'Hear, O Christ; long live Augustine,
sixteen times.' 'Thee for our Father, Thee for our Bishop', twenty
times, 'Well deserving, truly worthy', five times;
and so on (St. Aug., Epist., 212; P.L., XXXIII, 966). In this,
however, there was clearly nothing liturgical, though that
character may perhaps be better recognized in the cries of, "He
is worthy, he is worthy, he is worthy; for many years", etc.,
which the people in certain ancient rituals were directed to
make when the bishop-elect was presented to them before his
consecration.
COUNCILS
Other acclamations meet us in the acts of some of the early
councils. They seem in most cases to have taken the form of
compliments to the emperors, and may often perhaps be no more
significant than a toast to the king and royal family at a
modern banquet. But we read of other cries, for instance, that
at the first session of the Council of Chalcedon (October, 451)
the Fathers shouted, regarding Dioscurus: "The scoffer always
runs away. Christ has deposed Dioscurus, Christ has deposed the
murderer"; or again: "This is a just verdict; This is a just
council"; or again, "God has avenged His Martyrs". Upon the
other meanings which have been attached to the word acclamation
some of them rather strained it does not seem necessary to speak
at length. (1) The applause of the congregation which often in
ancient times interrupted the sermons of favourite preachers.
(2) The prayers and good wishes found upon sepulchral monuments,
etc., to which the name acclamations is sometimes given. (3) The
brief liturgical formulae, such as Dominus vobiscum, Kyrie
Eleison, Deo gratias, etc. (4) For election by acclamation, see
ELECTION, CONCLAVE, and ACCLAMATION IN PAPAL ELECTIONS.
CABROL in Dict. d archeol. chret., 240-265. This article
includes a discussion of inscriptions, liturgical formulae, and
other miscellaneous matters. For the subject of Acclamations in
classical times, cf. DAREMBERG AND SAGLIO, Dict. des Antiq.,
s.v.; PAULY-WISSOWA, Real-Encyclopedie der classischen
Alterthumswissenschaft; MOMMSEN, Rom. Staatsrecht, III, 951,
349; PETER, Die Scriptores Hist. August. (Leipzig, 1892), 221
sqq.; HEER, in Philologus (supplementary vol.), IX (1904), 187
sqq. For CORONATIONS IMPERIAL AND PAPAL, see Le Laudes nell'
Incoronazione del Som. Pontifice, in La Civilta Cattolica, 15
Aug., 1903, 387-404; BRIGHTMAN, Byzantine Imperial Coronations,
in Journ. of Theol. Studies, April, 1901; GRISAR, Analecta
Romana (Rome, 1899), 229 sqq.; MARTENE, De Ant. Eccl. Rit.
(1737), II, 578, 851-852; DIEMAND, Das Ceremoniell der
Kaiserkronungen (Munich, 1894), 82; MASKELL, Monumenta Ritualia
(2d ed., Oxford, 1882), II, 85; LEGG, English Coronation Records
(London, 1901).
HERBERT THURSTON
Acclamation (In Papal Elections)
Acclamation (in Papal Elections)
One of the forms of papal election. The method of electing the
Roman Pontiff is contained in the constitutions of Gregory XV,
"AEterni Patris Filius" and "Decet Romanum Pontificem." Urban
VIII's constitution, "Ad Romani Pontificis Providentiam", is
confirmatory of the preceding. According to these documents,
three methods of election alone are valid; namely, by scrutiny,
by compromise, and by acclamation, or "quasi-inspiration." This
last form of election consists in all the cardinals present
unanimously proclaiming one of the candidates Supreme Pontiff,
without the formality of casting votes. As this must be done
without previous consultation or negotiation it is looked on as
proceeding from the Holy Ghost and hence is also designated
"quasi-inspiration". An example of this mode of election in more
recent times is found in the case of Clement X (1670-76),
formerly Cardinal Altieri, whose election is said to have been
determined by the sudden cry of the people outside the conclave,
"Altieri Papa", which was confirmed by the cardinals (Keller).
Innocent XI (1676-89) is another example. The cardinals
surrounded him in the chapel of the conclave and in spite of his
resistance every one of them kissed his hand, proclaiming him
Pope (De Montor).
FERRARIS, Bibliotheca, art. Papa (Rome, 1890); WERNZ, Jus
Decret. (Rome, 1899), II, tit. 30; DE MONTOR, Lives of Rom.
Pont. (News York), 1866); KELLER, Life of Leo XIII (News York,
1888); LECTOR, Le Conclave (Paris, 1898).
WILLIAM H.W. FANNING
Biblical Accommodation
Biblical Accommodation
We shall consider (1) what is meant by biblical accommodation;
(2) its use in Sacred Scripture; (3) the rules which ought to
regulate its use.
(1) What is Biblical Accommodation?
By accommodation is understood the adaptation of words or
sentences from Sacred Scripture to signify ideas different from
those expressed by the sacred author. Thus, if a sinner excuses
his fault by saying, "The serpent deceived me", he applies the
scriptural words of Eve (Gen., iii, 13) to express an idea which
the sentence does not convey in the Bible. Similarly, a blind
person might use the words of Tob., v, 12, "What manner of joy
shall be to me, who sit in darkness, and see not the light of
heaven". Here, again, the words would have a meaning which they
do not bear in Sacred Scripture. This accommodation is sometimes
incorrectly styled the accommodated, or accommodative, sense of
Scripture. From the definition it is clear that it is not a
sense of Scripture at all. The possibility of such accommodation
may arise, first, from some similarity between the ideas in the
sacred text and the subject to which the passage is
accommodated; secondly, from the fact that the words of
Scripture may be understood in two different senses. The first
is called extensive accommodation. Examples of it are found in
the Church's offices, both in the Breviary and the Missal, when
the praises bestowed by the Holy Ghost on Noe, Isaac, and Moses
are applied to other saints. Thus the words of Ecclus., xxxii,
1, 5: "Have they made thee ruler? . . . hinder not music" are
sometimes applied to College presidents assuming the burden of
their office; we need not say that the words of Sacred Scripture
have quite a different meaning. The second species of
accommodation, called allusive, is often a mere play on words
and at times seems due to a misunderstanding of the original
meaning. The Vulgate text, Mirabilis Deus in sanctis suis (Ps.,
lxvii, 36) means, in the mouth of the Psalmist, that God is
wonderful in His sanctuary ( sancta, -orum). The Latin words may
also be translated "God is wonderful in his saints" ( sancti,
-orum), and they are employed in this sense in the Missal. As
this second signification was not intended by the inspired
writer, the English rendering of the text in the Douay version
is a mistranslation.
(2) The Use of Accommodation in the Bible
It is generally held by Catholic authors that certain passages
from the Old Testament have been used over again in the New
Testament with a change of meaning. In the Epistle to the
Hebrews (xiii, 5) the words spoken to Josue, "I will not leave
thee, nor forsake thee" (Jos., i, 5), are applied to all
Christians. Other examples of accommodation are the use of
Exod., xvi, 18 in II Cor., viii, 15; Zach., iv, 14 in Apoc., xi,
4; Ps., vi, 9 in Matt., vii, 2, 3; Mich., vii, 6 in Matt, x, 36.
Evidently, the new meaning attached to the words is also
inspired. Rationalistic writers have maintained that similar
accommodations are to be found in every case where the
Evangelists quote the prophecies of the Old Testament. Some few
Catholic writers have been willing to grant this explanation for
a few passages, but the words in which the Evangelists assert
that events in Our Lord's life took place "in order that" the
prophecies might be fulfilled are incompatible with the theory
that their wished to indicate only a resemblance between the
event and the prophet's words. It is probable that no prophecy
is used in the Gospels merely by accommodation.
(3) Rules for Accommodation
The use of accommodation in the Liturgy and by the Fathers of
the Church is sufficient to show that it is legitimate. Hence
texts have been, and are frequently, accommodated by preachers
and ascetical authors. Many of the sermons of St. Bernard are
mosaics of Scripture phrases and owe much of their peculiar
unction to his happy use of the sacred words. Latin writers and
preachers have not been so reverent and careful in their
accommodation, and this was one of the abuses condemned by the
Council of Trent when it forbade the wresting of Scripture to
profane uses (Sess. IV, Decret. "De editione et usu Sacrorum
Librorum "). Interpreters are wont to give the following rules
for guidance in the accommodation of Scripture:
+ Accommodated texts should never be used as arguments drawn
from revelation; for the words are not employed in the sense,
either literal or typical, intended by the Holy Ghost.
Violations of this rule are not rare, either in sermons or in
pious literature.
+ Accommodation should not be farfetched. Allusive
accommodations in many cases are mere distortions of the
sacred text.
+ Accommodations should be reverent. Holy words should be
employed for purposes of edification, not to excite laughter,
much less to cloak errors.
Cornely, Introductio Generalis,, nn. 206-208; Patrizi, De
Interpretatione Bibliorum (Rome, 1862), 273 sq.; Vasquez in S.
Thom., I, Q. i, a. 7, dist. 14; Serarius, Prolegomena Biblica,
21, 14; Acosta, De vera Scripturas tractandi ratione, III,
v-viii; Vigouroux, Manuel biblique, I; Longhaye, La predication
(Paris, 1888), 295-301; Bainvel, Les contresens biblioques;
Mangenot in Vig. Dict. de la Bible, s.v. Accommodation; cf.
works on biblical hermeneutics, and also many of the
introductions to Sacred Scripture.
JOHN CORBETT
Accomplice
Accomplice
A term generally employed to designate a partner in some form of
evildoing. An accomplice is one who cooperates in some way in
the wrongful activity of another who is accounted the principal.
From the viewpoint of the moral theologian not every such
species of association is straightway to be adjudged unlawful.
It is necessary to distinguish first of all between formal and
material cooperation. To formally cooperate in the sin of
another is to be associated with him in the performance of a bad
deed in so far forth as it is bad, that is, to share in the
perverse frame of mind of that other. On the contrary, to
materially cooperate in another's crime is to participate in the
action so far as its physical entity is concerned, but not in so
far as it is motived by the malice of the principal in the case.
For example, to persuade another to absent himself without
reason from Mass on Sunday would be an instance of formal
cooperation. To sell a person in an ordinary business
transaction a revolver which he presently uses to kill himself
is a case of material cooperation. Then it must be borne in mind
that the cooperation may be described as proximate or remote in
proportion to the closeness of relation between the action of
the principal and that of his helper. The teaching with regard
to this subject-matter is very plain, and may be stated in this
wise: Formal co operation is never lawful, since it presupposes
a manifestly sinful attitude on the part of the will of the
accomplice. Material complicity is held to be justified when it
is brought about by an action which is in itself either morally
good or at any rate indifferent, and when there is a sufficient
reason for permitting on the part of another the sin which is a
consequence of the action. The reason for this assertion is
patent; for the action of the accomplice is assumed to be
unexceptionable, his intention is already bespoken to be proper,
and he cannot be burdened with the sin of the principal agent,
since there is supposed to be a commensurately weighty reason
for not preventing it. Practically, however, it is often
difficult to apply these principles, because it is hard to
determine whether the cooperation is formal or only material,
and also whether the reason alleged for a case of material
cooperation bears due proportion to the grievousness of the sin
committed by the principal, and the intimacy of the association
with him. It is especially the last-named factor which is a
fruitful source of perplexity. In general, however, the
following considerations will be of value in discerning whether
in an instance of material cooperation the reason avowed is
valid or not. The necessity for a more and more powerful reason
is accentuated in proportion as there is
+ a greater likelihood that the sin would not be committed
without the act of material cooperation;
+ a closer relationship between the two; and
+ a greater heinousness in the sin, especially in regard to harm
done either to the common weal or some unoffending third
party.
It is to be observed that, when damage has been done to a third
person, the question is raised not only of the lawfulness of the
cooperation, but also of restitution to be made for the
violation of a strict right. Whether in that case the accomplice
has shared in the perpetration of the injustice physically or
morally (i.e. by giving a command, by persuasion, etc.) whether
positively or negatively (i.e. by failing to prevent it) the
obligation of restitution is determined in accordance with the
following principle. All are bound to reparation who in any way
are accounted to be the actual efficient causes of the injury
wrought, or who, being obliged by contract, express or implied,
to prevent it, have not done so. There are circumstances in
which fellowship in the working of damage to another makes the
accomplice liable to restitution in solidum; that is, he is then
responsible for the entire loss in so far as his partners have
failed to make good for their share. Finally, mention must be
made of the Constitution of Benedict XIV, Sacramentum
Poenitentiae , governing a particular case of complicity. It
provides that a priest who has been the accomplice of any person
in a sin against the Sixth Commandment is rendered incapable of
absolving validly that person from that sin, except in danger of
death, and then only if there be no other priest obtainable.
GENICOT, Theol. Moralis (Louvain, 1898).
JOSEPH F. DELANY
Francesco Accursius
Francesco Accursius
(Italian Accorso).
(1)FRANCESCO ACCURSIUS (1182-1260)
A celebrated Italian jurisconsult of the Middle Ages, b. at
Florence, 1182; d. at Bologna, 1260. After applying himself to
various studies until he was twenty-eight, or according to other
statements, thirty-seven years old, he took up the law and
became one of its most distinguished exponents. He taught at
Bologna, and then devoted himself to compiling a glossary or
commentary on the whole body of law, which took precedence of
any work then extant. Accorso, or Accursius, was not proficient
in the classics, but he was called "the Idol of the
Jurisconsults".
(2) FRANCESCO ACCURSIUS (1225-1293)
Son of the preceding, and also a lawyer, b. at Bologna, 1225; d.
1293. The two are often confounded. Francesco was more
distinguished for his tact than for his wisdom. Edward I of
England, returning from the Holy Land, brought him with him to
England. He returned to Bologna in 1282, and practiced law there
until his death. His two sons, Cervottus and Guglielmo, and a
daughter studied law with him and also practiced in Bologna.
Dante places Francesco Accursius in Hell (Inf. XV, 110). The
tomb of his father and himself in Bologna bears the inscription:
"Sepulchrum Accursii, glossatoris legum, et Francisci, ejus
filii."
Giraud, Bibl., Sac.
JOHN J. A' BECKET
Acephali
Acephali
A term applied to the Eutychians who withdrew from Peter Mongus,
the Monophysite Patriarch of Alexandria, in 482. With the
apparent purpose of bringing the orthodox and heretics into
unity, Peter Mongus and Acacius of Constantinople had elaborated
a new creed in which they condemned expressly Nestorius and
Eutyches, but at the same time affected to pass over the
decisions of the Council of Chalcedon and rejected them
hypocritically. This ambiguous formula, though approved by the
Emperor Zeno and imposed by him in his edict of union, or
Henoticon, could only satisfy the indifferent. The condemnation
of Eutyches irritated the rigid Monophysites; the equivocal
attitude taken towards the Council of Chalcedon appeared to them
insufficient, and many of them, especially the monks, deserted
Peter Mongus, preferring to be without a head ( akephaloi),
rather than remain in communion with him. Later, they joined the
partisans of the Monophysite Patriarch of Antioch, Severus. The
Deacon Liberatus (Breviarium, P.L., LVIII, 988) supposes the
name Acephali (Headless) to have been given to those at the
Council of Ephesus who followed neither Cyril of Alexandria nor
John of Antioch.
LEONT. BYZANT., De Sectis, in P.G., LXXXII 1230; BARONlUS,
Annales, an. 482; HEFELE, Hist. of Councils, II; BARDENHEWER in
Kirchenlex. (Freiburg, 1882), I.
JOHN J. A'BECKET
The Archdiocese of Acerenza
The Archdiocese of Acerenza
(ACHERONTIA.)
This archdiocese, in the provinces of Lecce and Potenza, Italy,
has been united since 1203 with the Diocese of Matera. It lays
claim to a very early, even Apostolic, origin. Acerenza was
certainly an episcopal see in the course of the fifth century,
for in 499 we meet with the name of its first known bishop,
Justus, in the Acts of the Roman Synod of that year. The town is
situated on an elevated ridge of the Apennines whence the eye
dominates both the Adriatic and the Mediterranean; it was known
in antiquity as the high nest of Acherontia (Hor., Odes, III,
iv, 14). The cathedral is one of the oldest and most beautiful
in Italy, and has lately become quite famous for a bust long
supposed to be that of St. Canus or Canius (Ascanius?) patron of
the city, but now judged to be a portrait-bust of Julian the
Apostate, though others maintain that it is a bust of the
Emperor Frederick II, after the manner of the sculptors of the
Antonine age. Acerenza was in early imperial times a populous
and important town, and a bulwark of the territory of Lucania
and Apulia. In the Gothic and Lombard period it fell into decay,
but was restored by Grimwald, Duke of Beneventum (687-689). An
Archbishop of Acerenza (Giraldus) appears in 1063 in an act of
donation of Robert Guiscard to the monastery of the Holy Trinity
in Venosa. For a few years after 968 Acerenza was forced to
adopt the Greek Rite in consequence of a tyrannical order of the
Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus Phocas (963-969), whereby it was
made one of five suffragans of Otranto, and compelled to
acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople
(Moroni, Dizionario, L, 63). Pope Urban VI (1378-89, Bartolommeo
Prignano), was once Archbishop of Acerenza. Matera is said to
have been created a see by the Greeks. Its cathedral dates from
the year 1000, and is likewise a richly ornamented specimen of
contemporary ecclesiastical architecture in Southern Italy. The
Archdiocese of Acerenza contains 22 parishes, 308 secular
priests, and a few priests of religious orders. The population
numbers 147,900. The present bishop is Monsignor Raffaele Rossi,
successor (1899) of Monsignor Diomede Falconio, now Apostolic
Delegate to the United States.
UGHELLI, Italia Sacra (Venice, 1722), VII, 5; CAPPELLETTI, Le
chiese d'Italia (Venice, 1866), XX, 420-431; LENORMANT, A
travers l'Apulie et la Lucanie (Paris, 1874), I, 271; VOLPE,
Memorie storiche, profane e religiose sulla citt`a di Matera
(Naples, 1813).
ERNESTO BUONAIUTI
Achab
Achab
( 'A'h'abh, Achaab in Jer., xxix, 22, 'Ehabh, Achiab)
Son of Amri and King of Israel, 918-897 B.C., according to III
K., xvi, 29, but 875-854 according to the Assyrian documents.
The original reading of III K., xvi, 29, may have been changed.
The King was married to Jezabel, a Sidonian princess, and was
misled by her into idolatry (III K., xvi, 31 sqq.) the
persecution of the prophets (III K., xviii, 13 sqq.), and a most
grievious injustice against Naboth (III K., xxi). He was twice
victorious in his wars against Syria (III K., xx, 1328), and
made an alliance with the Syrian King Benadad in spite of
prophetic warning (III K., xx, 33). In the sixth year of
Salmanassar II the allies were overcome by the Assyrians near
Karkar, and their compact ceased. Achab now allied himself with
Josaphat, King of Juda, and they began war against Syria in
order to conquer Ramoth Galaad (III K., xxii, 3 sqq.). The false
prophets foretold victory, while Micheas predicted defeat. The
battle was begun in spite of this warning, and an arrow wounded
Achab between the lungs and the stomach (III K., xxii, 34). He
died in the evening, and when his chariot was washed in the pool
of Samaria, the dogs licked up his blood (III K., xxii, 38).
MECHINEAU in VIG., Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895); HAGEN,
Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); WELTE in Kirchenlex.
A.J. MAAS
Achaia
Achaia
(AEgialeia).
The name, before the Roman conquest in 146 B.C., of a strip of
land between the gulf of Corinth in the north and Elis and
Arcadia in the south, embracing twelve cities leagued together.
The Achaean League was prominent in the struggle of the Greeks
against Roman domination; It is probably due to this fact that
the name was afterwards extended to the whole country south of
Macedonia and Illyricum, corresponding approximately to modern
Greece. During the Roman period Achaia was usually governed as a
senatorial province. The Governor was an ex-Praetor of Rome, and
bore the title of Proconsul. Corinth was the capital. When St.
Paul came into Achaia (Acts 18), Gallio, a brother of Seneca,
was proconsul. His refusal to interfere in the religious affairs
of the Jews and the tolerance of his administration favoured the
spread of Christianity. In Corinth the Apostle founded a
flourishing church. In his Second Epistle to the Corinthians, he
salutes Christians "in all Achaia" (i, 1) and commends their
charity (ix, 2).
RAMSAY in HASTINGS, Dict. of the Bible; MOMMSEN, Provinces of
the Roman Empire (Rom. Gesch.), V, vii.
W.S. REILLY
Achaicus
Achaicus
A Corinthian Christian, who, together with Fortunatus and
Stephanas, carried a letter from the Corinthians to St. Paul,
and from St. Paul to the Corinthians (I Corinthians 16:17; cf.
also 16:15).
A.J. MAAS
Achaz
Achaz
(AHAZ).
King of Juda, placed variously, 741-726 B.C., 744-728, 748-727,
724-709, 734- 728. It seems to be certain that
Theglathphalasar's first expedition against Damascus mentioned
in the life of Achaz fell in 733 B.C., and the second in 731.
Owing to his idolatry (IV K., xvi, 3, 4, II Par., xxviii, 24),
Achaz was conquered first by Rasin, King of Syria, and then by
Phacee, King of Israel (II Par., xxviii, 5; IV K., xvi, 6). Now,
Rasin and Phacee made an alliance in order to dethrone the house
of David in Juda, and to make the son of Tabeel king (Is., vii,
26). The prophet Isaias offers to Achaz God's aid with the
promise of safety in case of belief, but with the threat of
punishment in case of unbelief (Is., vii, 1221). Achaz is
unbelieving, seeks help from Theglathphalasar, offering at the
same time rich presents from the temple treasury (IV K., xvi, 7,
8). The king of the Assyrians takes Damascus, afflicts Israel
(IV K., xv, 29; xvi, 9), but reduces Juda to the necessity of
buying its freedom (IV K., xvi, 17; II Par., xxviii, 20). Achaz
was not improved by this affliction, but he introduced into the
temple an altar modelled after that at Damascus (IV K., xvi, 14
sq.; II Par., xxviii, 2225). On account of the king's sin Juda
was also oppressed by the Edomites and the Philistines (II Par.,
xxviii, 17 sq.).
RENARD in VIG, Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895); PEAKE in
HASTINGS, Dist. of the Bible (New York, 1903); HAGEN, Lexicon
Biblicum (Paris, 1905).
A.J. MAAS
Lucas d'Achery
Lucas d'Achery
French Benedictine (Maurist), born 1609 at Saint Quentin in
Picardy; died in the monastery of St. Germain des Pres at Paris,
29 April, 1685. He was a profound student of medieval historical
and theological materials, mostly in original manuscripts, to
the collection, elucidation, and printing of which he devoted
his whole life. He entered the Order of St. Benedict at an early
age, was professed at the Abbey of the Blessed Trinity, Vendome,
4 October, 1632, but his health soon obliged him to remove to
Paris. He became a member (1637) of the monastery of St. Germain
des Pre, and in his long sojourn of nearly fifty years scarcely
ever quitted its walls. As librarian of the monastery he was
soon acquainted with its rich treasures of medieval history and
theology, and by a continuous correspondence with other
monasteries, both in and out of France, he soon made himself a
bibliographical authority of the first rank, especially in all
that pertained to the unedited or forgotten writings of medieval
scholars. His first important work was an edition (Paris, 1645)
of the "Epistle of Barnabas", whose Greek text had been prepared
for the press, before his death, by the Maurist Hugo Menard.
D'Achery's "Asceticorum vulgo spiritualium opusculorum
Indiculus" (Paris, 1645) served as a guide to his confre, Claude
Chantelou, in the preparation of the five volumes of his
"Bibliotheca Patrum ascetica" (Paris, 1661). In 1648 he
published all the works of Blessed Lanfrac of Canterbury (P. L.,
CL, 9). He published and edited for the first time the works of
Abbot Guibert of Nogent (Paris, 1661) with an appendix of minor
writings of an ecclesiastical character. In 1656 he edited the
"Regula Solitaria" of the ninth century priest Grimlaicus
(Grimlaic), a spiritual guide for hermits. His principal work,
however, is the famous "Spicilegium, sive Collectio veterum
aliquot scriptorum qui in Galliae bibliothecis, maxime
Benedictinorum, latuerunt" (Paris, 1655-77), continued by Baluze
and Martene, to whom we owe and enlarged and improved edition
(Paris, 1723). D'Achery collected the historical materials for
the great work known as "Acta Ordinis S. Benedicti" but Mabillon
added so much to it in the way of prefaces, notes, and
"excursus" that it is justly accounted as his work. D'Achery was
the soul of the noble Maurist movement, and a type of the
medieval Benedictine, humble and self-sacrificing, virtuous and
learned. Despite continued illness he was foremost in all the
labours of the French Benedictines of St. Maur, and was the
master of many of the most illustrious among them, e. g.
Mabillon. His valuable correspondence is preserved in the
Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris.
THOMAS J. SHAHAN
Achiacharus
Achiacharus
Achiacharus is mentioned only once in the Vulgate version of
Tobias (xi, 20, under the form Achior), but the name occurs four
times in the Greek versions. He is represented as a nephew of
Tobias, and an influential minister of the Assyrian King
Esarhaddon (681-668 B.C.). On the relation, supposed by some
critics, of this personage to Ahiakar the Wise, of eastern
legend, see E. Cosquin, in Revue biblique Internationale, 1899,
50 sq.
W.S. REILLY
Achimaas
Achimaas
(1) Father of Achinoam, wife of Saul (I Kings 14:50).
(2) Son of Sadoc, the priest. He was a swift-footed messenger in
the service of David during the rebellion of Absalom. He brought
from Jerusalem news of the enemy's movements, and, after the
battle in which Absalom was slain, he was the first to reach the
King with the news of victory. He was "a good man", according to
David (II Kings 15:35-36; 17:17 sq.; 18:19 sq.). This Achimaas
is perhaps the same as one of Solomon's prefects, the governor
of Nephtali, and son-in-law of the King (III Kings 4:15).
W.S. REILLY
Achimelech
Achimelech
(1) The priest of Nobe who extended hospitality to David during
his flight from the court of Saul. For this he was put to death,
together with all the priests of Nobe, except Abiathar, his son,
who escaped and joined David (I Kings 21-22).
(2) A Hethite, companion of the outlawed David (I Kings 26:6).
(3) There is an Achimelech spoken of (II Kings 8:17, and I
Paralipomenon 18:16; 24:3, 6, 31), as a "son of Abiathar" and an
associate of Sadoc in the priesthood. As this position is
usually attributed to "Abiathar, son of Achimelech" it is
thought that the reading "Achimelech, son of Abiathar" is due to
an accidental transposition of the text of Kings, and that this
transposition has affected the text of Paralipomenon.
(4) Name given to Achis, King of Geth, in the title of Psalm 33.
Some texts have Abimelech.
W.S. REILLY
Achitopel
Achitopel
Achitopel was an able and honoured counsellor of David, who
joined the rebellion of Absalom. The King was much affected by
this desertion. Hearing that the man on whose word he had been
wont to rely as "on an oracle of God" was giving his advice to
the enemy, he prayed the Lord to "infatuate the counsel of
Achitopel." Some have seen in Psalms 54:13-15 and 40:10,
reflections of David on this faithless friend. It was on the
advice of Achitopel that Absalom took possession of his father's
harem, thus cutting off all hope of reconciliation.
Understanding the need of energetic measures, he urged that
12,000 men be sent from Jerusalem in pursuit of the King. He
offered to lead them himself. Chusai, a secret friend of David,
defeated his purpose. Thereupon he proudly withdrew to his town
of Gilo, put his house in order, and strangled himself. (See II
Kings, xv, 12; xvii, 23; I Par., xxvii, 33.) It would seem from
a conjunction of II Kings, xxiii, 34, and xi, 3, that Achitopel
was the grandfather of Bethsabee, and it has been suggested, as
an explanation of his conduct towards David, that he had kept a
secret grudge against the King for the way he had treated
Bethsabee, and her first husband, the unfortunate Urias. This,
or some motive of ambition, would be in keeping with the haughty
character of Achitopel. Dryden has used this name in the title
of his famous satire against the Protestant Party, "Absalom and
Achitophel."
W.S. REILLY
The Diocese of Achonry
The Diocese of Achonry
(Gaelic, Achadh-Chonnaire, Connary's Field).
In Ireland, suffragan to the Archdiocese of Tuam. The village of
Achonry occupies a very picturesque situation in the south of
the County Sligo. Here St. Finian, who died in 552, established
a church and monastery on some land given him by the prince of
the Clann Chonnaire. Over this he placed Nathi O Hara, who had
been his pupil in the famous school of Clonard and is always
spoken of in the annals as Cruimthir-Nathi, i.e. the Priest
Nathi. In a short time the monastery and its head acquired a
remarkable reputation, and a diocese was formed (c. 560) of
which Nathi is reputed to have been the first bishop, though he
may have been only the abbot-superior, according to the Irish
system of ecclesiastical organization from the sixth to the
twelfth century, which permitted in monastic government such
peculiar subordination. He is the patron of the diocese, and his
feast is celebrated on 9 August. His successors made use of his
monastery-church as their cathedral, and traces of it may still
be seen. The diocese was formerly sometimes called Leyney from
one of its largest and most important baronies, or perhaps
because it was coextensive with what is still known as the
barony of Leyney. Additions were made to it at different periods
until its boundaries were finally fixed in the twelfth century.
It now includes some of Roscommon, a considerable part of Mayo,
and the greater part of Sligo. At the important Synod of Kells,
held in March, 1152, presided over by Cardinal Paparo, and
attended by the Bishop of Lismore, then Apostolic Delegate, by
twenty other bishops, and by many inferior clergy, the Diocese
of Achonry was represented by its bishop, Melruan O'Ruadhan. Its
diocesan limits were then fixed, and it was made suffragan to
Tuam. From that date the catalogue of its bishops is less
fragmentary. Of the three Irish bishops who were members of the
Council of Trent, one was Eugene O'Hart, Bishop of Achonry. He
is described in the records of the Council as a "professor of
Theology and a learned and distinguished ecclesiastic", and had
been a Dominican of Sligo Abbey. He took a prominent part in its
deliberations, and left on all its members a deep impression of
his zeal and learning. From the death of Dr. O'Hart in 1603,
except for a brief interval of four years (1641-45), there was
no bishop until 1707, and the diocese was governed by
vicars-apostolic. Achonry is one of the most Catholic dioceses
in the world. The total population, according to the latest
census (1901) is 82,795, of which 2,242 are non-Catholics, so
that 97.3 percent of the whole are Catholics. Achonry has
twenty-two parishes, twenty of which have parish priests with
full canonical rights; the remaining two are mensal parishes of
the bishop. There are 51 priests in the diocese, and though at
one period of its history Achonry was studded with religious
houses, it has at the present time no regular clergy. There are
7 congregations of religious sisters: 3 of the Irish Sisters of
Charity, 2 of the Sisters of Mercy, 1 of the Sisters of St.
Louis, and 1 of the Marist Sisters. The Christian Brothers have
a house in Ballaghaderreen and the Marist Brothers one in
Swineford. Full provision is made for the education of the
young. In addition to the episcopal seminary with five
professors there are day schools under the nuns and brothers and
201 schools under lay teachers. There is besides a
boarding-school for young ladies conducted by the Sisters of St.
Louis. There are also under the charge of the nuns 2 industrial
and 7 technical schools. Since the accession of Dr. M. Nicholas
in 1818, the bishop resides in Ballaghaderreen. The cathedral, a
very fine Gothic building, erected at great expense by Dr.
Durcan, has been completed by the present bishop, Dr. Lyster, by
the addition of a magnificent tower and spire. Within the last
fifty years many new churches, some very beautiful, have been
built, old ones renovated, houses supplied for the clergy,
convents established. and schools provided.
GAMS, Series episcop. Eccl. cath. (1873), I, 204, 234 (1886),
II, 64; BRADY, Episcopal Succession in England, Scotland, and
Ireland (Rome, 1876); LANIGAN, Eccl. Hist. of Ireland (Dublin,
1829), I, 345; LEWIS, Topographical Hist. of Ireland (London,
1837), 6; BURKE, History of the Archbishops of Tuam (Dublin,
1882); Annals of the Four Masters (ed. O'DONOVAN, Dublin, 1658),
VII, s. v., Achadh Chonnaire.
E.H. CONINGTON
Achor Valley
Achor Valley
The scene of the death of the "troubler" Achan, with whom its
name is associated (Jos., vii, 26). Osee foretells the time when
this gloomy, ill-omened valley will be for an "opening of hope"
to the returning exiles of Israel (Os., ii, 15); another prophet
pictures it, in the same glorious future, transformed into a
"place for the herds to lie down in" (Is., lxv, 10). It was on
the north boundary of Juda, leading past Jericho to the Jordan
(Jos., xv, 7).It is commonly identified with the modern
Wady-el-Kelt and is usually written Akor.
W.S. REILLY
Achrida
Achrida
A titular see in Upper Albania, the famous metropolis and
capital of the medieval kingdom of Bulgaria, now the little
village of Ochrida, on the Lake of Ochrida, the ancient Lacus
Lychnitis, whose blue and exceedingly transparent waters in
remote antiquity gave to the lake its Greek name. The city was
known in antiquity as Lychnidus and was so called occasionally
in the Middle Ages. In the conflicts of the Illyrian tribes with
Rome it served the former as a frontier outpost and was later
one of the principal points on the great Roman highway known as
the via Egnatiana. Its first known bishop was Zosimus (c. 344).
In the sixth century it was destroyed by an earthquake (Procop.,
Hist. Arcana, xv), but was rebuilt by Justinian (527-565), who
was born in the vicinity, and is said to have been called by him
Justiniana Prima, i.e. the most important of the several new
cities that bore his name. Duchesne, however, says that this
honour belongs to Scupi (Uskub), another frontier town of
Illyria (Les eglises separees, Paris, 1856, 240). The new city
was made the capital of the prefecture, or department, of
Illyria, and for the sake of political convenience it was made
also the ecclesiastical capital of the Illyrian or Southern
Danubian parts of the empire (Southern Hungary, Bosnia, Servia,
Transylvania, Rumania). Justinian was unable to obtain
immediately for this step a satisfactory approbation from Pope
Agapetus or Pope Silverius. The Emperor's act, besides being a
usurpation of ecclesiastical authority, was a detriment to the
ancient rights of Thessalonica as representative of the
Apostolic See in the Illyrian regions. Nevertheless, the new
diocese claimed, and obtained in fact, the privilege of
autocephalia, or independence, and through its long and
chequered history retained, or struggled to retain, this
character. Pope Vigilius, under pressure from Justinian,
recognized the exercise of patriarchal rights by the
Metropolitan of Justiniana Prima within the broad limits of its
civil territory, but Gregory the Great treated him as no less
subject than other Illyrian bishops to the Apostolic See
(Duchesne, op. cit., 233-237). The inroads of the Avars and
Slavs in the seventh century brought about the ruin of this
ancient Illyrian centre of religion and civilization, and for
two centuries its metropolitan character was in abeyance. But
after the conversion of the new Bulgarian masters of Illyria
(864) the see rose again to great prominence, this time under
the name of Achrida (Achris). Though Greek missionaries were the
first to preach the Christian Faith in this region, the first
archbishop was sent by Rome. It was thence also that the
Bulgarians drew their first official instruction and counsel in
matters of Christian faith and discipline, a monument of which
may be seen in the Responsa ad Consulta Bulgarorum of Nicholas I
(858-867), one of the most influential of medieval canonical
documents (Mansi, xv, 401; Hefele, Concilieng., iv, 346 sq.).
However, the Bulgarian King (Car) Bogaris was soon won over by
Greek influence. In the Eighth General Council held at
Constantinople (869) Bulgaria was incorporated with the
Byzantine patriarchate, and in 870 the Latin missionaries were
expelled. Henceforth Greek metropolitans preside in Achrida; it
was made the political capital of the Bulgarian kingdom and
profited by the tenth- century conquests of its warlike rulers
so that it became the metropolitan of several Greek dioceses in
the newly conquered territories in Macedonia, Thessaly, and
Thrace. Bulgaria fell unavoidably within the range of the
Photian schism, and so, from the end of the ninth century, the
diocese of Achrida was lost to Western and papal influences. The
overthrow of the independent Bulgarian kingdom in the early part
of the eleventh century by Basil the Macedonian brought Achrida
into closer touch with Constantinople. At a later date some of
the great Byzantine families (e.g. the Ducas and the Comneni)
claimed descent from the Kings, or Cars, of Bulgaria. In 1053
the metropolitan Leo of Achrida signed with Michael Caerularius
the latter's circular letter to John of Trani (Apulia in Italy)
against the Latin Church. Theophylactus of Achrida (1078) was
one of the most famous of the medieval Greek exegetes; in his
correspondence (Ep., 27) he maintains the traditional
independence of the Diocese of Achrida. The Bishop of
Constantinople, he says, has no right of ordination in Bulgaria,
whose bishop is independent. In reality Achrida was during this
period seldom in communion with either Constantinople or Rome.
Towards the latter see, however, its sentiments were less than
friendly, for in the fourteenth century we find the metropolitan
Anthimus of Achrida writing against the procession of the Holy
Spirit from the Father and the Son ( see TRINITY). Latin
missionaries, however, appear in Achrida in the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries, mostly Franciscan monks, to whom the
preservation of the Roman obedience in these regions is largely
owing (see ALBANIA). The Latin bishops of Achrida in the
seventeenth century are probably, like those of our of own time,
titular bishops. The ecclesiastical independence of Achrida
seeming in modern times to leave an opening for Roman Catholic
influence in Bulgaria, Arsenius, the Orthodox Patriarch of
Constantinople, had it finally abolished in 1767 by an order of
Sultan Mustapha. At the height of its authority, Achrida could
count as subject to its authority ten metropolitan and six
episcopal dioceses.
FARLATI, Illyr. Sacr., VIII, 18, 158; LEQUIEN, Oriens
Chrtstianus, II, 282-300; III, 953-954; DUCHESNE, Les glises
autoc phales. in Les eglises separees (Paris, 1896); GELZER, Das
Patriarchat von Akrida (1902); KRUMBACHER, Gesch. d. byzant.
Litt. (2d ed., Munich, 1897), 994 sqq.; NEHER, in Kirchenlex.,
I, 165-167.
THOMAS J. SHAHAN.
Johann Heinrich Achterfeldt
Johann Heinrich Achterfeldt
Theologian, b. at Wesel, 17 June, 1788; d. at Bonn, 11 May,
1877. He was appointed professor of theology at Bonn in 1826 and
in 1832 he founded with his colleague, J.W.J. Braun (d. 1863),
the "Zeitschrift fuer Philosophie und Katholische Theologie"
(1832-52), the chief purpose of which was to defend the
teachings of Hermes. He also published under the title
"Christkatholische Dogmatik" (Muenster, 1834-36) the theological
writings which Hermes (d. 1831) had left in MSS. This
publication was followed by sharp controversy, and eventually by
the condemnation of the works of Hermes, which Pope Gregory XVI
placed upon the Index, 26 September, 1835. In 1843, Achterfeldt
incurred suspension from his professorial chair rather than sign
the declaration of faith required by the Coadjutor Archbishop
von Geissel of Cologne. Though Hermesianism lost ground and
finally disappeared during the revolution of 1848, Achterfeldt
clung to his views. In 1862, however, he was reinstated as
professor, and in 1873, having made his submission to
ecclesiastical authority, he was freed from suspension.
MUeLLER, in Dict. de theol. catholique, s. v.; HERGENR THER,
Handbuch d. allg. Kirchengesch. (Freiburg, 1886), III, 969.
E.A. PACE
Theodore William Achtermann
Theodore William Achtermann
A German sculptor, was born in 1799, at Munster in Westphalia,
of poor parents. After working on a farm he became a
cabinetmaker. His carving was so clever and graceful that it
attracted attention, and procured him the good will of some art
patrons, who sent him to Berlin (1831), where he studied under
the direction of Rauch, Tieck, and Schadow, then the foremost
sculptors of Germany. Achtermann, however, being of a profoundly
religious character, was drawn irresistibly to Rome, where he
arrived in 1839 and remained till the end of his life. The first
prominent product of his Roman studies was a Piet`a which was
secured for the Cathedral of Muenster and which has often been
copied. In 1858 the same cathedral acquired a group of seven
life-size figures representing the descent from the Cross which
is regarded as one of its chief art treasures. His last great
work, finished when the artist had passed his seventieth year,
was a Gothic altar with three reliefs representing scenes from
the life of Our Saviour. This was set up in the cathedral at
Prague in the year 1873. He died at Rome in 1889. Achtermann's
art is characterized by deep religious feeling and great
imaginative power, though, on account of his having taken to an
artistic career when somewhat advanced in life, he did not
attain the technical mastery which he might otherwise have
acquired.
HERTKENS, Wilhelm Achtermann (Trier, 1895).
CHARLES G. HERBERMANN
Valens Acidalius
Valens Acidalius
(German, Havekenthal).
Philologist, Latin poet, and convert to the Catholic Church, b.
1567 at Wittstock in the Mark of Brandenburg; d. 25 May, 1595,
at Neisse. After his education at the universities of Rost ck,
Greifswald, and Helmstaedt, he began the study of medicine, but
later devoted most of his time to the Latin classics, spending
three years in the universities of Padua and Bologna and
travelling through the chief Italian cities. After taking his
degree of Doctor of Medicine at Bologna, he devoted himself
entirely to Latin literature. Returning to Germany in 1593 in
feebler health, he found a patron in Johann Matthaeus Wacke von
Wackenfels, also a convert, and chancellor to the Bishop of
Breslau, Andreas von Jerin. In 1595 he became a Catholic, and,
about the same time, Rector of the Breslau Gymnasium. He died a
few weeks later. Before his death appeared Animadversiones in Q.
Curtium (Frankfurt, 1594) and Plautinae divinationes et
interpretationes (Frankfurt, 1595). A posthumous work is Notae
in Taciti opera, in Panegyricos veteres. Lipsius spoke of him as
a "pearl of Germany", and Ritschl, as having a "remarkable
critical faculty."
BINDER in Kirchenlex.; RAeSS, Convertiten.
F.M. RUDGE
The Diocese of Aci-Reale
The Diocese of Aci-Reale
(JACA REGALIS).
Located in the island of Sicily; includes fourteen communes in
the civil province of Catania, immediately subject to Rome. It
was created by Gregory XVI, in 1844, though no bishop was
appointed until 1872. The episcopal city is picturesquely
situated at the foot of Mt. Etna, amid rich gardens of oranges
and almonds. There are 18 parishes, 305 churches, 330 secular
priests, 70 regulars, and 150,219 inhabitants. Its first bishop
was Monsignor Gerlando Maria Genuardi, of the Oratory.
CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia (Venice, 1866), XXI, 569; GAMS,
Series episcoporum ecclesiae catholicae (Ratisbon, 1873), 955;
VIGO, Notizie storiche della citta d'Acireale (Palermo, 1836);
PIRRI, Sicilia Sacra (Palermo, 1733), continued by MARZO-FERRO
(ibid., 1860). For the controversy concerning the cultus of St.
Expedite, see Civilta Cattolica, 2, and 16 Dec. 1905, also
Analecta Bolland. (1906), I.
Leopold Ackermann
Leopold Ackermann
A Catholic professor of exegesis, b. in Vienna, 17 November,
1771; d. in the same city, 9 September, 1831. He entered the
canons regular of St. Augustine, taking, in religion, the name
of Peter Fourrier. He taught Oriental languages and archaeology,
and in 1806 became professor of exegesis of the Old Testament in
the University of Vienna, succeeding Jahn there. He filled this
chair for twenty-five years with success. Two works of his,
"Introductio in libros Veteris Foederis usibus academicis
accomodata" (Vienna, 1825) and "Archaeologia biblica" (Vienna,
1826), have new and corrected editions by Jahn, third and fourth
respectively. The latter was reprinted by Migne (Cursus
Scripturae Sacrae, II, 1840, col. 823-1068).He also wrote
"Prophetae Minores perpetua annotatione illustrata" (Vienna,
1830), in which he gives nothing new but collects whatever is
best in older works, and supplies philological observations upon
it. He reproduces the original Hebrew text and comments on it,
briefly but excellently.
SEBACK, P.F. Ackermann, biographische Skizze (Vienna, 1832);
VIGOROUX in Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895), I, 149, 150.
JOHN J. A'BECKET
Acmonia
Acmonia
A titular see of Phrygia Pacatiana, in Asia Minor, now known as
Ahat-Keui. It is mentioned by Cicero (Pro Flacco, 15) and was a
point on the road between Dorylaeum and Philadelphia.
SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr. (London, 1878), I, 21;
MAS LATRIE, Tr sor de chronologie, etc. (Paris, 1887), 1979.
Acoemetae
Acoemetae
(Greek akoimetai, from privative a and koiman, to rest).
Sometimes, an appellation common to all Eastern ascetics known
by the rigour of their vigils; but usually, the name of a
special order of Greek or Basilian monks devoting themselves to
prayer and praise without intermission, day and night. That
order was founded, about the year 400, by a certain Alexander, a
man of noble birth, who fled from the court of Byzantium to the
desert, both from love of solitude and fear of episcopal
honours. When he returned to Constantinople, there to establish
the laus perennis, he brought with him the experience of a first
foundation on the Euphrates and three hundred monks. The
enterprise, however, proved difficult, owing to the hostility of
Patriarch Nestorius and Emperor Theodosius. Driven from the
monastery of St. Mennas which he had reared in the city, and
thrown with his monks on the hospitality of St. Hypathius, Abbot
of Rufiniana, he finally succeeded in building at the mouth of
the Black Sea the monastery of Gomon, where he died, about 440.
His successor, Abbot John, founded on the eastern shore of the
Bosphorus, opposite Sostenium or Istenia, the Irenaion, always
referred to in ancient documents as the "great monastery" or
motherhouse of the Acoemetae. Under the third abbot, St.
Marcellus, when the hostility of Patriarch and Emperor had
somewhat subsided, Studius, a former Consul, founded in the city
the famous "Studium" which later, chiefly under Abbot Theodore
(759-826), became a centre of learning as well as piety, and
brought to a culmination the glory of the order. On the other
hand, the very glamour of the new "Studites" gradually cast into
the shade the old Acoemetae. The feature that distinguished the
Acoemetae from the other Basilian monks was the uninterrupted
service of God. Their monasteries, which numbered hundreds of
inmates and sometimes went into the thousand, were distributed
in national groups, Latins, Greeks, Syrians, Egyptians; and each
group into as many choirs as the membership permitted and the
service required: With them the divine office was the literal
carrying out of Psalm cxviii, 164: "Seven times a day have I
given praise to Thee," consisting as it did of seven hours:
orthrinon, trite, ekte, enate, lychnikon, prothypnion,
mesonyktion, which through St. Benedict of Nursia passed into
the Western Church under the equivalent names of prime, tierce,
sext, none, vespers, compline, matins (nocturns) and lauds. The
influence of the Acoemetae on Christian life was considerable.
The splendour of their religious services largely contributed to
shape the liturgy. Their idea of the laus perennis and similar
institutions, passed into the Western Church with St. Maurice of
Agaune and St. Denys. Our modern perpetual adoration is a
remnant of it. Even before the time of the Studites, the copying
of manuscripts was in honour among the Acoemetae, and the
library of the "Great Monastery," consulted even by the Roman
Pontiffs, is the first mentioned by the historians of Byzantium.
The Acoemetae took a prominent part -- and always in the sense
of orthodoxy -- in the Christological discussions raised by
Nestorius and Eutyches, and later, in the controversies of the
Icons. They proved strong supporters of the Apostolic See in the
schism of Acacius, as did the Studites in that of Photius. The
only flaw which marred the purity of their doctrine and their
loyalty to Rome, occurred in the sixth century, when, the better
to combat the Eutychian tendencies of the Scythian monks, they
themselves fell into the Nestorian error and had to be
excommunicated by Pope John II. But it was the error of a few (
quibusdam paucis monachis, says a contemporary document), and it
could not seriously detract from the praise given their order by
the Roman Synod of 484: "Thanks to your true piety towards God,
to your zeal ever on the watch, and to a special gift of the
Holy Ghost, you discern the just from the impious, the faithful
from the miscreants, the Catholics from the heretics."
HELYOT, Histoire des ordres monastiques (Paris, 1714);
HEIMBUCHER, Orden u. Kongregationen (Paderborn, 1896); MARIN,
Les moines de Constantinople De Studio, Coenobio
Constantinopolitano (Paris, 1897); GARDNER, Theodore of Studium
(London, 1905).
J.F. SOLLIER
Acolouthia
Acolouthia
(From the Greek akoloutheo, to follow.)
In ecclesiastical terminology signifies the order or arrangement
of the Divine Office (perhaps because the parts are closely
connected and follow in order) and also, in a wide sense, the
Office itself. The Acolouthia is composed of musical and
rhetorical elements, the first usually given in the musical mode
or tone ( Echos), according to which the liturgical compositions
are chanted. There are eight modes, four primary and four
secondary. As the Greeks rarely used texts set to musical
notation, they learned by heart the words and music of some
standard hymn or canticle, and this served as a model for other
hymns of the same rhythm. A strophe or stanza of a standard hymn
which indicates the melody of a composition, is known as a
hirmos ( eirmos). Some believe that a hirmos placed at the end
of a hymn should be called a catabasia ( katabasia) while others
hold that the catabasia is a short hymn sung by the choir, who
descend from their seats into the church for the purpose. The
fundamental element of the Acolouthia is the troparion, which is
a short hymn, or one of the stanzas of a hymn. The contakion (
kontakion) is a troparion which explains briefly the character
of the feast celebrated in the day's Office. The oikos is a
somewhat longer troparion, which in concise style glorifies the
virtues and merits of the subject of the feast. The apolytikion
is a troparion which is proper to the day, and is said just
before the prayer of dismissal.
The ode was originally one of the nine inspired canticles sung
in the morning Office, but later the name was also given to
uninspired compositions, consisting of a varying number of
poetical troparia and modelled after the Scriptural odes. Such
odes are often combined to form a canon ( kanon) which is
usually composed of nine, but sometimes of a smaller number of
odes. Finally, the stichos is a short verse taken from the
Psalms or some other book of Holy Scripture, while the sticheron
is a short verse of ecclesiastical composition modelled after
the stichos. The parts of the Office are the Little Vespers, the
Greater Vespers, the Orthros (dawn), the four little Hours, and
the Apodeipnon (compline). The Little Vespers, which are recited
before sunset, consist of the invitatory versicles, Psalms 103
and 140, several stichoi and similar stichera, a short hymn, and
a psalm, some similar stichera and stichoi, the Nunc dimittis,
the trisagion, and the apolytikion.
Greater Vespers, which are said after sunset, begin with the
invitatory, Psalm 103 and the greater litany, and then the
priest says the prayers of the Lychnic. The choir recites the
first cathisma (division of the psalter), and after the deacon
has said the litany it chants Psalm 140, and several versicles
during the incensation. After changing his vestments in the
sacristy, the priest says the prayer for the entrance, the
deacon after some versicles recites the litanies, and the priest
says the prayer of benediction. During the procession to the
narthex, stichera proper to the feast are recited, and then the
priest recites a series of prayers, to which the choir answers
Kyrie Eleison many times, and the priest blesses all present.
Next the stichera proper to the feast are said by the choir with
the Nunc dimittis, the trisagion, a prayer to the Trinity, the
Lord's Prayer, and the apolytikion, and Vespers are concluded
with lessons from the Scriptures. The first part of the Orthros,
or midnight office, consists of twelve prayers, the greater
litany, two stichera followed by Psalms 134 and 135, a third
sticheron followed by the gradual psalms, an antiphon with the
prokeimenon, the reading of the Gospel, many acclamations and
three canons of odes, while the second part of the Orthros,
corresponding to Lauds in the Roman Office, is composed of
Psalms 148, 149, 150, several similar stichera, the greater
doxology, a benediction, and the prayer for the dismissal.
Each little Hour is followed by a supplementary hour, called a
Mesorion. Prime begins with the recitation of three psalms
followed by a doxology, two stichoi, a doxology, a troparion in
honour of the Theotokos (the Birthgiver of God, i.e. the Blessed
Virgin), the trisagion, several variable troparia, the doxology
and dismissal, while its supplementary Hour is composed of a
troparion, doxology, troparion of the Theotokos, Kyrie Eleison
repeated forty times, a prayer, and a doxology. Terce, Sext, and
None each contain the invitatory versicles, three psalms, a
doxology, two stichoi, a doxology, the troparion of the
Theotokos, the trisagion, doxology, another troparion of the
Blessed Virgin, and the Kyrie Eleison repeated forty times, and
their Mesoria have the invitatory versicles, three psalms, a
doxology, troparion, doxology, troparion of the Theotokos, Kyrie
Eleison repeated forty times, and a proper prayer.
Before or after None, an office called Ta typika is recited,
which consists ordinarily of the invitatory versicles, Psalms
102 and 145, and a troparion, but in the seasons of fasting this
Office is regulated by different rubrics. The last part of the
Office is called the Apodeipnon and corresponds to the Roman
Compline. The greater Apodeipnon is said during Lent, the little
Apodeipnon during the rest of the year. The latter is composed
of a doxology, troparion, the trisagion, the Lord's Prayer, the
Kyrie Eleison repeated twelve times, and invitatory versicles,
and Psalms 50, 69, and 162, which are followed by the greater
doxology, the Creed, the trisagion, the Lord's Prayer, the
troparion proper to the feast, the Kyrie Eleison repeated forty
times, several invocations, and the long prayers of dismissal.
RAYAEUS, Tractatus de Acolouthia, etc., in Acta SS., June II,
13; LECLERCQ in Dict. d'archeol. chret., II., 340; NEALE,
History of the Holy Eastern Church (London, 1850).
J.F. GOGGIN
Acolyte
Acolyte
(Gr. akolouthos; Lat. sequens, comes, a follower, an attendant).
An acolyte is a cleric promoted to the fourth and highest minor
order in the Latin Church, ranking next to a subdeacon. The
chief offices of an acolyte are to light the candles on the
altar, to carry them in procession, and during the solemn
singing of the Gospel; to prepare wine and water for the
sacrifice of the Mass; and to assist the sacred ministers at the
Mass, and other public services of the Church. In the ordination
of an acolyte the bishop presents him with a candle,
extinguished, and an empty cruet, using appropriate words
expressive of these duties. Altar boys are often designated as
acolytes and perform the duties of such. The duties of the
acolyte in Catholic liturgical services are fully described in
the manuals of liturgy, e.g. Pio Matinucci, "Manuale Sacrarum
Caeremoniarum" (Rome, 1880), VI, 625; and De Herdt, "Sacrae
Liturgiae Praxis" (Louvain, 1889), II, 28-39.
It is just possible that the obscure passage in the life of
Victor I (189-199), erroneously attributed by Ferraris (I, 101)
to Pius I (140-155), concerning sequentes may really mean
acolytes (Duchesne, Lib. Pont., I, 137; cf. I, 161). Be this as
it may, the first authentic document extant in which mention is
made of acolytes is a letter (Eus., Hist. Eccl., VI, xliii),
written in 251, by Pope Cornelius to Fabius, Bishop of Antioch,
and in which we possess a definite enumeration of the Roman
clergy. There existed at that time in Rome forty-six priests,
seven deacons, seven sub-deacons, forty-two acolytes, and
fifty-two exorcists, lectors, and doorkeepers. It is worthy of
note that two hundred and fifty years later the "Constitutum
Silvestri," a document of about 501 (Mansi, "Coll. Conc.," II,
626; cf. "Lib. Pont.," ed. Duchesne, Introd., 138), gives
forty-five acolytes as the number in Rome. Pope Fabian
(236-250), the immediate predecessor of Cornelius, had divided
Rome into seven ecclesiastical districts or regions, setting a
deacon over each one. A redistribution of the clergy of the city
soon followed according to these seven divisions. The Roman
acolytes were subject to the deacon of the region, or, in case
of his absence or death, to the archdeacon. In each region there
was a deacon, a subdeacon, and according to the numeration
above, probably six acolytes. Ancient ecclesiastical monuments
and documents lead us to believe that a subdeacon was a sort of
head-acolyte or arch-acolyte, holding the same relation to the
acolytes as the archdeacon to deacons, with this difference,
however, that there was only one archdeacon, while there was a
deacon for each region. As late as the first half of the tenth
century we meet with the term arch-acolyte in Luitprand of
Cremona ("Antapodosis", VI, 6; Muratori, "SS. Rer. Ital.", II,
1, 473), where it stands for a "dignity" (q.v.) in the
metropolitan church of Capua. We may therefore regard the
ministry of the subdeacon and acolyte as a development of that
of the deacon. Moreover, these three categories of clerics
differ from the lower orders in this, that they are all attached
to the service of the altar, while the others are not.
The letters of St. Cyprian (7, 28, 34, 52, 59, 78, 79) give
ample proof of the fact that at Carthage also, in the middle of
the third century, acolytes existed. Eusebius (De Vita
Constant., III, 8) mentions the acolytes present at the Council
of Nice (325), not as designated for the service of the altar,
but as persons attached to the retinue of bishops. The "Statuta
Ecclesiae Antiqua", often referred to as the decrees of the
so-called Fourth Synod of Carthage (398), but really belonging
to the end of the fifth, or the early part of the sixth, century
(Duchesne, "Christian Worship", 332, 350), prove that this order
was then known in the ecclesiastical province of Arles in Gaul,
where these decrees were enacted. It would seem, however, that
all the churches in the West, and more especially the smaller
churches, did not have acolytes. We might conclude that at
Reims, in the fifth century, there were no acolytes, if we could
attach credence to the will of Bishop Bennadius, predecessor of
St. Remigius. He gives all the categories of clerics except this
one (Flodoard, Hist. Rem. Eccl., I, ix, in P.L., LXXXV, 43). In
the Christian epigraphy of Gaul mention is made, as far as is
known, of only one acolyte, viz., at Lyons in 517 (La Blant,
"Inser. chret. de la Gaule," I, 36), and, in general, very few
epigraphs of acolytes are found in the first five centuries. In
the Irish Collection of Canons (Collectio Canonum Hibernensis,
ed. Wasserschleben, Giessen, 1874, 32) the arch-acolyte is not
mentioned among the seven ecclesiastical degrees, but placed
with the psalmist and cantor outside the ordinary hierarchy.
In the sixth canon of the aforementioned "Statuta" the duties of
acolytes are specified, as they are by a contemporary writer,
John the Deacon, in his letter to Senarius (P.L., LIX, 404).
Specific information concerning the place and duties of acolytes
in the Roman Church between the fifth and ninth centuries is
drawn from a series of ancient directions known as the "Ordines
Romani" (q.v.-Duchesne, op. Cit., 146 and passim). According to
them there were in Rome (perhaps also in Carthage, and other
large Western cities) three classes of acolytes, all of whom,
nevertheless, had their duties in relation to the liturgical
synaxes or assemblies: (1) those of the palace ( palatini), who
served the Pope (or bishop) in his palace, and in the Lateran
Basilica; (2) those of the region ( regionarii), who assisted
the deacons in their duties in the different parts of the city;
(3) those of the station ( stationarii), who served in church;
these last were not a distinct body, but belonged to the
regional acolytes. Regional acolytes were also termed titular (
titulares) from the church to which they were attached
(Mabillon, "Comm. in Ord. Rom.", in his "Musaeum Italicum," II,
20; for an old epigraph in Aringhius, 156, see Ferraris, I, 100;
Magani, "Antica Lit. Rom.", Milan, 1899, III, 61 - see also
ROME, CITY OF). Acolytes of the palace were destined in a
particular manner to the service of the Pope, assisting him not
only in church functions, but also as ablegates, messengers of
the papal court, in distributing alms, carrying pontifical
documents and notices, and performing other duties of like
character. These offices, however, acolytes shared with readers
and subdeacons, or arch-acolytes. At Rome they carried not only
the eulogia (q.v.), or blessed bread, when occasion required,
but also the Blessed Eucharist from the Pope's Mass to that of
the priests whose duty it was to celebrate in the churches
(tituli). This is evident from the letter of Innocent I
(401-417) to Decentius, Bishop of Gubbio, in Italy (P.L., XX,
556). They also carried the sacred species to the absent,
especially to confessors of the faith detained in prison (see
TARSICIUS). This office of carrying the Blessed Eucharist, St.
Justin, who suffered martyrdom about 165 or 166, had previously
assigned to deacons (Apolog., I, 67), which would indicate that
at that time acolytes did not exist.
We learn still further from the "Ordines Romani" that when the
Pope was to pontificate in a designated district all the
acolytes of that region went to the Lateran Palace to receive
and accompany him. In the sixth or seventh century, perhaps a
little earlier, the chief acolyte of the stational church,
carrying the sacred chrism covered with a veil, and, directing
the procession, preceded on foot the horse on which the Pope
rode. The other acolytes followed, carrying the Gospel-book,
burses, and other articles used in the holy sacrifice. They
accompanied the Pope to the secretarium or sacristy (see
BASILICA). One of them solemnly placed the book of Gospels upon
the altar. They carried seven lighted candles before the pontiff
entering the sanctuary. With lighted candles, two acolytes
accompanied the deacon to the ambo (q.v.) for the singing of the
Gospel. After the Gospel, another acolyte received the book,
which, placed in a case and sealed, was later returned to the
Lateran by the head acolyte. An acolyte carried to the deacon at
the altar, the chalice and pall; acolytes received, and cared
for, the offerings gathered by the Pope; an acolyte held the
paten, covered with a veil, from the beginning to the middle of
the canon. In due time acolytes bore, in linen bags, or burses
suspended from their necks, the oblata, or consecrated loaves
from the altar to the bishops and priests in the sanctuary; that
they might break the sacred species (see FRACTIO PANIS). It will
be seen from these, and other duties devolving upon acolytes,
that they were in a large measure responsible for the successful
carrying out of pontifical and stational ceremonies. This was
particularly true after the foundation of the Schola Cantorum
(q.v.) at Rome, of which there is clear evidence from the
seventh century onward. Being then the only ones in minor orders
engaged in active ministry, acolytes acquired a much greater
importance than they had hitherto enjoyed. Cardinal priests had
no other assistants in their titular churches. During Lent, and
at the solemnization of baptism, acolytes fulfilled all the
functions which hitherto had devolved upon the exorcists, just
as the subdeacon had absorbed those of the lector or reader.
Alexander VII (1655-67) abolished the medieval college of
acolytes described above and substituted in their place (26
October, 1655) the twelve voting prelates of the Signature of
Justice. As evidence of their origin these prelates still
retain, at papal functions, many of the offices or duties
described above.
According to the ancient discipline of the Roman Church the
order of acolyte was conferred as the candidate approached
adolescence, about the age of twenty, as the decree of Pope
Siricius (385) to Himerius, Bishop of Tarragona, in Spain, was
interpreted (P.L., XIII, 1142). Five years were to elapse before
an acolyte could receive subdeaconship. Pope Zosimus reduced
(418) this term to four years. The Council of Trent leaves to
the judgment of bishops to determine what space should elapse
between the conferring of the acolythate and subdeaconship; it
is also interesting to note, with Dr. Probst (Kirchenlex., I,
385), that the Council's desire (Sess. XXIII, c. 17, de ref.)
concerning the performance of ministerial services exclusively
by minor-order clerics was never fulfilled. In ancient
ecclesiastical Rome there was no solemn ordination of acolytes.
At communion-time in any ordinary Mass, even when it was not
stational, the candidate approached the Pope, or in his absence,
one of the bishops of the pontifical court. At an earlier moment
of the Mass he had been vested with the stole and the chasuble.
Holding in his arms a linen bag ( porrigitur in ulnas ejus
sacculus super planetam; a symbol of the highest function of
these clerics, that of carrying, as stated above, the
consecrated hosts) he prostrated himself while the Pontiff
pronounced over him a simple blessing (Mabillon, op. Cit., II,
85, ed. Paris, 1724). It may be well to mention here the two
prayers of the ancient Roman Mass-book known as the
"Sacramentarium Gregorianum" (Mabillon, Lit. Rom. Vetus, II,
407), said by the Pontiff over the acolyte, and the first of
which is identical with that of the actual Roman Pontifical
"Domine, sancte Pater, aeterne Deus, qui ad Moysen et Aaron
locutus es," etc.
According to the aforementioned "Statuta Ecclesiae Antiqua,"
which give us the ritual usage of the most important churches in
Gaul about the year 500, the candidate for acolyte was first
instructed by the bishop in the duties of his office, and then a
candlestick, with a candle extinguished, was placed in his hand
by the archdeacon, as a sign that the lights of the church would
be in his care; moreover, an empty cruet was given him,
symbolical of his office of presenting wine and water at the
altar for the holy sacrifice. A short blessing followed. (See
MINOR ORDERS; FRACTIO PANIS; EUCHARIST; MASS.)
ANDREW B. MEEHAN
Joaquin Acosta
Joaquin Acosta
A native of Colombia in South America, who served in the
Colombian army and in 1834 attempted a scientific survey of the
country between Socorro and the Magdalena River. Seven years
later he explored western Colombia from Antioquia to Ancerma
studying its topography, its natural history and the traces of
its aboriginal inhabitants. In 1845 he went to Spain to examine
such documentary material concerning Colombia and its colonial
history as was then accessible, and three years later he
published his "Compendio", a work on the discovery and
colonization of New Granada (Colombia). The map accompanying
this work, now out of date, was very fair for the time, and the
work itself is still valuable for its abundant bibliographic
references and biographic notes. What he says in it of the
writings of Quesada the conqueror of New Granada, is very
incomplete and in many ways erroneous, but his biographies of
the the ecclesiastics to whom, following upon Quesada, our
knowledge of the country, its colonization, is due, remain a
guide to the student of Spanish-American history. Without him,
we might yet be ignorant of the fundamental works of Zamora,
Fresle, and of the linguistic labours of Lugo. One year after
the "Compendio", the "Semenario" appeared at Paris, embodying
the botanical papers of Caldas.
AD. F. BANDELIER
Jose de Acosta
Jose de Acosta
The son of well-to-do and respected parents, born at Medina del
Campo in Spain, 1540; died at Salamanca, 15 February, 1600. He
became a novice in the Society of Jesus at the age of thirteen
at the place of his birth. Four of his brothers successively
joined the same order. Before leaving Spain, he was lecturer in
theology at Ocana, and in April, 1569, was sent to Lima, Peru,
where the Jesuits had been established in the proceeding year.
At Lima, Acosta again occupied the chair of theology. his fame
as an orator had proceeded him. In 1571 he went to Cuzco as a
visitor of the college of the Jesuits then recently founded.
Returning to Lima three years later, to again fill the chair of
theology, he was elected provincial in 1576. He founded a number
of colleges, among them those of Arequipa, Potose, Chuquisaca,
Panama, and La Paz, but met with considerable opposition from
the viceroy, Francisco de Toledo. He official duties obliged him
to investigate personally a very extensive range of territory,
so that he acquired a practical knowledge of the vast province,
and of its aboriginal inhabitants. At the provincial, council of
1582, at Lima, Acosta played a very important part. Called to
Spain by the King in 1585, he was detained in Mexico, where he
dedicated himself to studies of the country and people.
returning to Europe, he filled the chair of theology at the
Roman college in 1594, as well as other important positions. At
the time of his death, he was rector of the college at
Salamanca.
Few members of the Society of Jesus in the sixteenth century
have been so uniformly eulogized as Father Acosta. Independently
of his private character, his learning and the philosophic
spirit pervading his works attracted the widest attention in
learned circles. Translations of his works exist in many
languages of Europe, while the naturalists of the eighteenth
century praise his knowledge of the flora of western South
America. Aside from his publication of the proceedings of the
provincial councils of 1567 and 1583, and several works of
exclusively theological import, Acosta is best known as writer
through the "De Natura Novi Orbis." "De promulgatione Evangelii
apud Barbaros, sive De Procuranda Indorum salute", and above
all, the "Historia natural y moral de las Indias." The first two
appeared at Salamanca in 1588, the last at Seville in 1590, and
was soon after its publication translated into various
languages. It is chiefly the "Historia natural y moral" that has
established the reputation of Acosta. In a form more concise
than that employed by his predecessors, Gomara and Oviedo, he
treats the natural and philosophic history of the New World from
a broader point of view. Much of what he says is of necessity
erroneous, because it is influenced by the standard of knowledge
of his time; but his criticisms are remarkable, while always
dignified. He reflects the scientific errors of the period in
which he lived, but with hints of a more advanced understanding.
As far as the work of the Church among the Indians is concerned,
the "De procuranda Indorum salute" is perhaps more valuable than
the "Historia," because it shows the standpoint from which
efforts at civilizing the aborigines should be undertaken. That
standpoint indicates no common perception of the true nature of
the Indian, and of the methods of approaching him for his own
benefit.
De Backer, Bibliotheque des equivains de la Cie. de Jesus. Among
earlier sources, Father Eusebius Nieremberg, Anella Oliva,
Historia del Peru y de los Verones insignes de la Compagnia de
Jesus (1639) deserves mention, as well as Nicholas Antonio,
Biblioteca Vetustisima and the Bibliography of Beristain de
Souza; writers on Spanish-American literature generally mention
Acosta. A good Bibliography, and a short Biography of Acosta,
are found in Enrique Torres Saldanando, Los antiquos Jesuitas
del Peru (Lima, 1882). See also: Mendiburu, Diccionaria
historico-biografica del Peru, I (1874).
AD. F. BANDELIER
Acquapendente
Acquapendente
A diocese in Italy under the immediate jurisdiction of the Holy
See, comprising seven towns of the Province of Rome.
Acquapendente was under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of
Orvieto until 1649. That year, in consequence of a conspiracy,
Cristoforo Girarda, a Barnabite of Novara, Bishop of Castro, was
assassinated. In punishment of this crime, Innocent X ordered
Castro to be destroyed, and raised Acquapendente to the dignity
of an episcopal city (Bull, 13 September, 1649). Its bishops,
however, retain the appellation "post Castrenses." The first
incumbent of the new See was the Hieronymite ( il
gerosolimitano) Pompeo Mignucci of Offida, who had been
Archbishop of Ragusa. He took possession 10 January, 1650. This
diocese contains 13 parishes; 80 churches, chapels, and
oratories; 47 secular clergy; 35 seminarians; 15 regular
priests; 49 religious (women); 30 confraternities. Population,
19,350.
UGHELLI, Italia Sacra (Venice, 1722), I, 583; CAPPELLETTI, Le
chiese d Italia (Venice, 1866), V, 549; GAMS, Series Episcoporum
Ecclesiae Catholicae (Ratisbon, 1873), 660; RHANGIASI,
Bibliografia istorica della citt`a e luoghi dello Stato
Pontificio (Rome, 1772).
ERNESTO BUONAIUTI
Acquaviva (Cardinals)
Acquaviva
Name of several Italian cardinals.
FRANCESCO, b. 1665 at Naples, of the family of the Dukes of
Atri. He filled various offices under Innocent XI, Alexander
VIII, Innocent XII, and Clement XI. The latter created him
Cardinal, and Bishop of Sabina. He died in 1723, and was buried
at Rome in the Church of Santa Cecilia.
GIOVANNI VINCENZO, Bishop of Melfi and Rapolla (1537),
Cardinal-priest of Sylvester and Martin (1542), d. in 1566.
GIULIO, b. at Naples, 1546; d. 1574. Nuncio of St. Pius V to
Philip II of Spain, made Cardinal by the same pope, whom he
assisted on his deathbed.
OTTAVIO (the elder), b. at Naples, 1560; d. 1612; filled various
offices under Sixtus V, Gregory XIV, and Clement VIII, was
Cardinal-legate in the Campagna and at Avignon, and was
instrumental in the conversion of Henri IV. Leo XI made him
Archbishop of Naples (1605).
OTTAVIO (the younger), of the family of the dukes of Atri, b. at
Naples, 1608; d. at Rome, 1674. He was made Cardinal in 1654 by
Innocent IX, and legate at Viterbo and in Romagna, where he
checked the ravages of the banditti. He is buried at Rome in the
church of Santa Cecilia.
TROIANO, b. 1694 at Naples, of the same ducal family; d. at Rome
in 1747. He was employed by Benedict XIII in the administration
of the Papal States, made Cardinal by Clement XII in 1732. He
represented in the Curia the Kings of Spain, Philip V and
Charles III, and at the former's request was made Archbishop of
Toledo, whence he was transferred to Montereale. He was
influential in the conclave that elected (17 August, 1740)
Benedict XIV. He is buried at Rome in the Church of Santa
Cecilia.
PASQUALE, of Avignon, b. 1719 at Naples; d. 1788. He was made
Cardinal by Clement XIV in 1773.
STAHL in Kirchenlex., I, 1177-78.
THOMAS J. SHAHAN
Claudius Acquaviva
Claudius Acquaviva
Fifth General of the Society of Jesus, born October, 1543; died
31 January, 1615. He was the son of Prince Giovanni Antonio
Acquaviva, Duke of Atri, in the Abruzzi, and, at twenty-five,
when high in favor at the papal court, renounced his brilliant
worldly prospects, and entered the Society. After being
Provincial both of Naples and Rome, he was elected General of
the Society, 19 February, 1581. He was the youngest who ever
occupied that post. His election coincided with the first
accusation of ambition ever made against a great official of the
Order. Manareus had been named Vicar by Father Mercurian, and it
was alleged that he aspired to the generalship. His warm
defender was Acquaviva, but to dispel the slightest suspicion,
Manareus renounced his right to be elected. Acquaviva was chosen
by a strong majority. His subsequent career justified the wisdom
of the choice, which was very much doubted at the time by the
Pope himself. During his generalship, the persecution in
England, wither he had once asked to go as a missionary, was
raging; the Huguenot troubles in France were at their height;
Christianity was being crushed in Japan; the Society was
expelled from Venice, and was oppressed elsewhere; a schism
within the Society was immanent; the pope, the Inquisition, and
Philip II were hostile. Acquaviva was denounced to the Pope,
even by men like Toletus (q.v.), yet such was his prudence, his
skill, his courage, and his success, that he is regarded as the
greatest administrator, after St. Ignatius, the Society ever
had. Even those who were jealous of him admitted his merit,
when, to satisfy them, the fifth and sixth Congregations ordered
an investigation to be made of his method of government. The
greatest difficulty he had to face was the schism organized in
Spain by Vasquez (q.v.). The King and Pope had been won over by
the dissidents. Open demands for quasi-independence for Spain
had been made in the Congregations of the Society. No Jesuit was
allowed to leave Spain without royal permission. Episcopal
visitation of the houses had been asked for and granted. But
finally, through the mediation of the English Jesuit, Robert
Parsons (q.v.), who was highly esteemed by Philip, the King was
persuaded of the impolicy of the measures, while Acquaviva
convinced the Pope that the schism would be disastrous for the
Church. Deprived of these supports the rebellion collapsed.
Simultaneously the Inquisition was doing its best to destroy the
Society. It listened to defamatory accusations, threw the
Provincial of Castille into prison, demanded the surrender of
the Constitutions for examination, until Acquaviva succeeded in
inducing the Pope to call the case to his own tribunal, and
revoke the powers which had been given to the Inquisition, or
which it claimed. Finally, Pope Sixtus V, who had always been
unfriendly to the Society, determined to change it completely.
The Emperor Ferdinand implored him not to act; the College of
Cardinals resisted; but the Pope was obstinate. The bull was
prepared, and Acquaviva himself was compelled to send in a
personal request to have even the name changed, when the death
of the pontiff saved the situation--a coincidence which gave
rise to accusations against the Society. His successor, Gregory
XIV, hastened to renew all the former privileges of the Order,
and to confirm its previous approbations.
During Acquaviva's administration, the protracted controversy on
Grace, between the Dominicans and the Jesuits, took place, and
was carried on with some interruptions for nearly nine years,
without either party drawing any decision from the Church, the
contestants being ultimately ordered to discontinue the
discussion. It was Acquaviva who ordered the scheme of Jesuit
studies, known as the "Ratio Studiorum" (q.v.), to be drawn up
which, with some modifications, has been followed to the present
day. Six of the most learned and experienced scholars of the
Society were summoned to Rome, who laid out the entire plan of
studies, beginning with theology, philosophy and their cognate
branches, and going down to the smallest details of grammar.
When finished, it was sent to the different Provinces for
suggestions, but was not imposed until 1592, and then with the
proviso that the Society would determine what charge was to be
to made, which was done in the General Congregation of 1593.
The period of his generalship was the most notable in the
history of the Society for the men it produced, and the work it
accomplished. The names of Suarez, Toletus, Bellarmine,
Maldontus, Clavius, Lessius, Ripalda, Ricci, Parsons, Southwell,
Campion, Aloysius Gonzaga, and a host of others are identified
with it. Royal and pontifical missions to France, Russia,
Poland, Constantinople, and Japan were entrusted to men like
Possevin, and Bellarmine, and Vallignani. Houses were multiplied
all over the world with an astonishing rapidity. The colleges
were educating some of the most brilliant statesmen, princes,
and warriors of Europe. The Reductions of Paraguay were
organized; the heroic work of the missions of Canada were begun;
South America was being traversed in all directions; China had
been penetrated, and the Jesuits were the emperor's official
astronomers; martyrs in great numbers were sacrificing their
lives in England, America, India, Japan, and elsewhere; and the
great struggle organized by Canisius and Nadal to check the
Reformation in Germany had been brought to a successful
conclusion. The guiding spirit of all these great achievements,
and many more besides, was Claudius Acquaviva. He died at the
age of seventy-one, 31 January, 1615. Jouvency says the longer
he lived the more glorious the Society became; and Cordarius
speaks of his election as an inspiration. Besides the "Ratio
Studiorum," of which he is substantially the author, as it was
under his initiative and supervision that the plan was conceived
and carried out, we have also the "Directorium Exercitiorum
Spiritualium S.P.N. Ignatii," or "Guide to the Spiritual
Exercises" which was also suggested and revised by him. This
work has been inserted in the "Corpus Instituti S.J." More
directly his are the "Industriae ad Curandos Aninme Morbos." As
General, he wrote many encyclical letters, and he is author of
nearly all the "Ordinationes Generalium" which were printed in
1595, with the Approbation of the Fifth General Congregation.
Many other documents and letters, relating chiefly to matters of
government. are still extant.
Jouvency, Epitome Hist. Soc. Jesu, IV; Cretineau-Joly, Historie
de la Comp de Jesus III; Varones Ilustres, V, 79; Menologium S.
J., 31 January.
T.J. CAMPELL
Acqui
Acqui
A diocese suffragan of Turin, Italy, which contains ninety-three
towns in the Province of Alexandria, twenty-three in the
Province of Genoa, and one in the Province of Cuneo. The first
indubitable Bishop of Acqui is Ditarius. A tablet found in 1753
in the church of St. Peter, informs us that Ditarius, the
bishop, died on the 25th of January, 488, in the Consulate of
Dinamias and Syphidius. Popular tradition gives Deusdedit,
Andreas Severus Masimus, and, earliest of all, Majorinus, as
bishops prior to him. Calculating the time that these bishops,
Roman certainly in name, governed this see, Majorinus probably
lived either at the end of the fourth, or in the beginning of
the fifth, century. It is very probable that the diocese of
Acqui was erected at the end of the fourth century, about the
same time, it would appear, as the dioceses of Novara, Turin,
Ivrea, Aosta and perhaps, Asti and Alba: Presupposing the fact
that the erection of dioceses in the provinces of the Roman
Empire, after Constantine, was not done without previous
agreement between the Church and the emperors, it is safe to say
that the most propitious time for such organization in Northern
Italy was the seven years of the reign of Honorius (395-402),
when a complete reorganization of the Provinces of Northern
Italy and Southern Gaul was effected. Other arguments could be
advanced to confirm the existence and episcopate of St.
Majorinus. The name was very common in the third, fourth, and
fifth centuries. St. Augustine (De Haer., I, 69) speaks of two
bishops of this name; two others appear as signers of the Letter
of the Synod of Carthage to Pope Innocent the First (401-417)
against Pelagius (Ep. St. Aug., II, 90). Veneration was offered
to the saint from time immemorial by the church in Acqui, shown
by his statues and relics. This veneration, however, has ceased
since a decree of the Congregation of Rites (8 April, 1628)
prohibited the veneration of saints whose sanctity had not been
declared by the Holy See. In the list of the bishops of Acqui,
St. Guido (1034-70) is worthy of note. He was of the Counts of
Acquasana under whose government the cathedral was erected, and
is the patron saint of Acqui. The bishopric contains 122
parishes; 456 churches, chapels, and oratories; 317 secular
priests; 180 seminarians; 42 regular priests; 20 lay-brothers;
75 religious (women); 60 confraternities; 3 boys schools (168
pupils); 4 girls' schools (231 pupils). Population, 18,120.
UGHELLI, Italia Sacra (Venice, 1722), IV, 326; CAPPELLETTI, Le
chiese d Italia (Venice, 1866), XIV, 134; GAMS, Series
Episcoporum Ecclesiae Catholicae (Ratisbon, 1873), 808; SAVIO,
Gli antichi vescovi d Italia dalle origini al 1300 descritti per
regioni, I Piemonte (Turin, 1899), 948; PEDROCCA, Solatia
chronologica sacrosanctae Aquensis Ecclesiae (manuscript in the
Curia of Acqui, 1628); MORIUNDUS, Monumenta Aquensia adjectae
sunt plures Alexandriae ac finitimarum Pedemontanae ditionis
provinciarum, Chartae et Chronica (Turin, 1790); BIORCI,
Antichit`a e prerogative d' Acqui Staziella sua istoria
profana-ecclesiastica (Tortona, 1818); MAMIO, Bibliografia
provvisoria acquese, in preparazione alla bibliografia storica
degli stati della monarchia di Savoia (Turin, 1885).
ERNESTO BUONAIUTI
Acre
Acre
(SAINT-JEAN-D'ACRE).
In Hebrew Accho, in the Books of Machabees Ptolemais, in Greek
writers Ake ( Arke), in Latin writers Ace or Acce, in Assyrian
inscriptions Ak-ku-u, in modern Arabic Akka.
Acre is a Syrian seaport on the Mediterranean, in a plain with
Mount Carmel on the south, and the mountains of Galilee on the
east. Though choked up with sand, it is one of the best harbours
on the Syrian coast. The city was built by the Chanaanites, and
given to the tribe of Aser (Judges, i, 31), but not conquered
(Jos., xix, 24-31). It is mentioned in Mich., i, 10. It was
taken by Sennacherib the Assyrian (704-680 B.C.), passed into
the power of Tyre, of the Seleucid kings of Syria, and the
Romans. At the time of the Macchabees it belonged for a short
time to the sanctuary in Jerusalem by gift of Demetrius Soter (I
Mach., x, 112, xiii). The Emperor Claudius granted Roman
municipal rights to the town; hence it received the name
"Colonia Claudii Caesaris." St. Paul visited its early Christian
community (Acts, xxi, 7). The city was taken by the Moslems A.D.
638, by the Crusaders A.D. 1104, again by the Moslems A.D. 1187,
by the Crusaders again A.D. 1191 and finally by the Moslems A.D.
1291. Though Napoleon could not conquer it in 1799, it was taken
by the Viceroy of Egypt in 1832, but reconquered by the Sultan
in 1840. Till about 1400 it was the see of a Latin bishop; it
has also been the residence of a few Jacobite bishops, and has
now a Melchite bishop who is subject to the Patriarch of
Antioch.
HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); NEHER in Kirchenlex.,
LEGENDRE in VIG., Dict. de la bible (Paris, 1895); EWING in
HASTINGS, Dict. of the Bible (New York, 1903).
A.J. MAAS
Acrostic
Acrostic
( Akros stichos, "at the end of a verse".)
A poem the initial or final letters (syllables or words) of
whose verses form certain words or sentences. Its invention is
attributed to Epicharmus. The most remarkable example of such a
poem is attributed by Lactantius and Eusebius to the Erythraean
sibyl, the initial letters forming the words Iesous Christos
Theou houios soter (stauros), "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour
(cross)". Omitting the doubtful parenthesis, these words form a
minor acrostic: Ichthys, fish, the mystical symbol of our Lord.
The acrostic is supposed to have been quite popular among the
early Christians. In a wider sense the name acrostic is applied
to alphabetical or "abecedarian" poems. In this kind of poetry
the successive verses or stanzas begin with the successive
letters of the alphabet. We see this exemplified is Pss. cxi,
cxii, cxix (Vulg. cx, cxi, cxviii); Prov., xxxi, 10-31; Lam., i,
ii, iii, iv; and in a less regular manner, in Pss. x, xxv, xxxv,
cxlv (Vulg. ix, xxiv, xxxiv, xxxvi, cxliv); Ecclus., li, 18-38.
(See HEBREW POETRY, PARALLELISM, PSALMS).
LECLERCQ in Dict. d'acheol. chret. et de lit. (Paris, 1903);
VIGOUROUX in Dict. de la bible, s.v. Alphabetique (Poeme)
(Paris, 1895).
A.J. MAAS
Acta Pilati
Acta Pilati
(Or the Gospel of Nicodemus.)
This work does not assume to have written by Pilate, but to have
been derived from the official acts preserved in the praetorium
at Jerusalem. The alleged Hebrew original is attributed to
Nicodemus. The title "Gospel of Nicodemus" is of medieval
origin. The apocryphon gained wide credit in the Middle Ages,
and has considerably affected the legends of our Saviour's
Passion. Its popularity is attested by the number of languages
in which it exists, each of these being represented by two or
more recensions. We possess a text in Greek, the original
language; a Coptic, an Armenian and a Latin, besides modern
translations. The Latin versions were naturally its most current
form and were printed several times in the fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries. One class of the Latin manuscripts contain
as an appendix or continuation, the "Cura Sanitatis Tiberii",
the oldest form of the Veronica legend.
The "Acta" consist of three sections, which reveal inequalities
of style. The first (i-xi) contains the trial of Jesus based
upon Luke, xxiii. The second part comprises xii-xvi; it regards
the Resurrection. An appendix, detailing the Descensus ad
Infernos, forms the third section, This does not exist in the
Greek text and is a later addition. Leucius and Charinus, the
two souls raised from the dead after the Crucifixion, relate to
the Sanhedrin the circumstances of Our Lord's descent to Limbo.
The well-informed Eusebius (325), although he mentions the Acta
Pilati referred to by Justin and Tertullian and heathen
pseudo-Acts of this kind, shows no acquaintance with this work.
We are forced to admit that is of later origin, and scholars
agree in assigning it to the middle of the fourth century. There
is no internal relation between the "Acta" and the feigned
letter found in the Acts of Peter and Paul. Epiphanius refers to
the Acta Pilati similar to our own, as early as 376, but there
are indications that the current Greek text, the earliest extant
form, is a revision of the original one. The "Acta" are of
orthodox composition and free from Gnostic taint. The book aimed
at gratifying the desire for extra-evangelical details
concerning Our Lord, and at the same time, to strengthen faith
in the Resurrection of Christ, and at general edification. The
writers (for the work we have is a composite) could not have
expected their production to be seriously accepted by
unbelievers. (See Apocryha, under Pilate Literature.)
The best Greek and Latin edition of the text, with notes, is
that of THILO, Codex Apocryphorum Nove Testamenti, I (Leipzig,
1832; TISCHENDORF, Evangelica Apocrypha (Leipzig, 1853, 1876),
is uncritical in this regard. For dissertations: LIPSIUS, Die
Pilatus Akten kritisch untersucht (Kiel 1871); WUeLCKER, Das
Evangelium Nicodemi in der abendlandischer Litteratur
(Paderborn, 1872); DOBSCHUeTZ, art. Gospel of Nicodemus in
Hastings, Dict. of the Bible, extra volume; LIPSIUS, art.
Apocryphal Gospel, in Dict. of Christ. Biog., II, 707-709. The
Acta Pilati receives due notice in the histories of ancient
Christian literature by BARDENHEWER, ZAHN, HARNACK and
PREUSCHEN.
GEORGE J. REID
Acta Sanctae Sedis
Acta Sanctae Sedis
A Roman monthly publication containing the principal public
documents issued by the Pope, directly or through the Roman
Congregations. It was begun in 1865, under the title of "Acta
Sanctae Sedis in compendium redacta etc.", and was declared, 23
May, 1904, an organ of the Holy See to the extent that all
documents printed in its are "authentic and official".
Acta Sanctorum Hiberniae
Acta Sanctorum Hiberniae
The abbreviated title of a celebrated work on the Irish saints
by the Franciscan, John Colgan (Louvain, 1645). The full title
runs as follows: "Acta Sanctorum veteris et majoris Scotiae, seu
Hiberniae, Sanctorum Insulae, partim ex variis per Europam MSS.
codd. exscripta, partim ex antiquis monumentis et probatis
authoribus eruta et congesta; omnia notis et appendicibus
illustrata, per R.P.F. Joannem Colganum, in conventu F.F. Minor.
Hibern. Scrictioris Observ., Lovanii, S. Theologiae Lectorem
Jubilatum. Nunc primum de eisdem actis juxta ordinem mensium et
dierum prodit tomus primus, qui de sacris Hiberniae
antiquitatibus est tertius, Januarium, Februarium, et Martium
complectens." Colgan was an ardent Irishman, of the Mac Colgan
sept, b. in the County Derry, 1592. He entered the Irish House
of Franciscans, at Louvain, in 1612, and was ordained priest in
1618. Aided by Father Hugh Ward, O.F.M., Father Stephen White,
S.J., and Brother Michael O'Cleary, O.F.M., Colgan sedulously
collected enormous material for the Lives of the Irish Saints,
and at length, after thirty years of sifting and digesting his
materials, put to press his "Acta Sanctorum Hiberniae," a
portion of the expense of which was defrayed by Archbishop
O'Reilly of Armagh. The first volume, covering the lives of
Irish saints for the months of January, February, and March, was
intended to be the third volume of the "Ecclesiastical
Antiquities of Ireland," but only one volume was printed at
Louvain in 1645. To students of Irish ecclesiastical history
Colgan's noble volume is simply invaluable.
W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD
Acta Triadis Thaumaturgae
Acta Triadis Thaumaturgae
(THE ACTS OF A WONDER-WORKING TRIAD)
The lives of St. Patrick, St. Brigid, and St. Columba; published
at Louvain, in 1647, by John Colgan, O.F.M., mainly at the
expense of Thomas Fleming, Archbishop of Dublin. The full title
runs as follows: "Triadis Thaumaturgae, seu divorum Patricii,
Columbae, et Brigidae, trium veteris et majoris Scotiae, seu
Hiberniae, Sanctorum insulae, communium patronorum acta, a
variis, iisque pervetustis ac Sanctis, authoribus Scripta, ac
studio R.P.F. Joannis Colgani, in conventu F.F. Minor. Hibernor,
Stritior, Observ., Lovanii, S. Theologiae Lectoris Jubilati, ex
variis bibliothecis collecta, scholiis et commentariis
illustrata, et pluribus appendicibus aucta; complectitur tomus
secundus sacrarum ejusdem insulae antiquitatum, nunc primum in
lucem prodiens". Want of funds alone prevented the publication
of all the priceless material which Colgan had transcribed and
prepared for press, and from the catalogue of the manuscripts
found in his cell after his death, it is evident that the great
Irish hagiologist had given a detailed account of the labours of
Irish missionaries in England, Scotland, Belgium, Alsace,
Lorraine, Burgundy, Germany, and Italy. A small remnant of these
unpublished volumes is now in the Franciscan Library,
Merchants'' Quay, Dublin. In 1652 Colgan begged his superiors to
relieve him of the duties of guardian and professor, and he died
at St. Anthony''s, Louvain, 15 January, 1658, aged66.
W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD
Act of Settlement (Irish)
Act of Settlement (Irish)
In 1662 an act was passed by the Irish Parliament, the
privileges of which were restored on the return of Charles II,
entitled "an act for the better execution of his majesty's
gracious declaration for the Settlement of his Kingdom of
Ireland, and the satisfaction of the several interests of
adventurers, soldiers, and other his subjects there". To
understand the provisions of this complicated Act, and the Act
of Explanation of it (1664), it is necessary to recall that
during the time of Cromwell English adventurers, as they were
styled, advanced money for the war, and the soldiers engaged in
it had large sums due to them for arrears of pay. To meet these
demands, extirpate Papacy, and establish a Protestant interest
in Ireland, almost all the land in Munster, Leinster, and Ulster
was confiscated under the Cromwellian Settlement. The
confiscations were arranged under different categories in such a
way that scarcely any Catholic, or even Old Protestant, could
escape. All persons who had taken part in the rebellion, before
10 November, 1642, or who had assisted the rebels in any way
before that date, and also about 100 named persons, including
Ormond, Bishop Bramhall, and a great part of the aristocracy of
Ireland, were condemned to death, and their estates declared
forfeit. All other landowners who had at any period borne arms
against the Parliament, either for the rebels or for the King,
were deprived of their estates, but were promised land of a
third of the value in Connaught. Catholics who during the whole
of the war had never borne arms against the Parliament, but who
had not manifested "a constant good affection" towards it, were
to be deprived of their estates, but were to receive two-thirds
of their value in Connaught. Such a confiscation was practically
universal (Lecky, I, 106). The Puritan made no distinction
between the rebel and the royalist, and did not, of course,
consider himself bound by the Articles of Peace (17 January,
1649). By these Charles I, through Ormond, had engaged that,
with the exception of murderers, etc., all Catholics who
submitted to the articles should "be restored to their
respective possessions and hereditaments", and that all treason
etc., committed since the beginning of the rebellion, should be
covered by an "Act of Oblivion" (Articles of Peace, 1649, S: 4).
And Charles II, in a letter from Jersey, dated 2 February,
1649-50, to Ormond, ratifies and confirms this Peace (Carte,
III, 524-590, ed. 1851). Many of the Catholic proprietors had
never taken arms against the King, and the rest who had done so,
when the English Parliament announced its intention to extirpate
the Catholic religion in Ireland, with few exceptions submitted
under the Articles of Peace, and supported his cause to the end.
All these had a clear title to restoration, but the adventurers
and soldiers were in the actual possession of the lands, and
were allowed to vote as freeholders at the elections, though
they had no legal status, their titles resting on an act of
Cromwell's London Parliament, and an entry and ouster of the old
proprietors under it. The Catholics who were legally the true
freeholders had, of course, no votes. When the new Parliament
met, the Puritan adventurers and soldiers had an enormous
majority, while the Catholics were almost unrepresented in the
House of Commons (1662). The king had previously issued a
Declaration, in November, 1660, which was made the basis of the
Act of Settlement. The Irish Parliament, under Poyning's Act,
could not entertain a Bill that had not previously been
sanctioned by the Privy Council in England. He confirmed to the
adventurers all the lands possessed by them on 7 May, 1659,
allotted to them under the Cromwellian settlement. He did the
same as regards the soldiers with a few exceptions. Protestants,
however, whose estates had been given to adventurers or
soldiers, were to be at once restored, unless they had been in
rebellion before the cessation (truce) of 1643, or had taken out
orders for lands in Connaught or Clare, and the adventurers or
soldiers displaced were to be reprised, i.e. get other lands
instead. The Catholics were divided into "innocent" and
"nocent". No one was to be esteemed "innocent"
+ who, before the cessation of 15 September, 1643, was of the
rebels' party, or who enjoyed his estate in the rebels'
quarters, except in Cork and Youghal, where the inhabitants
were driven into them by force; or
+ who had entered into the Roman Catholic Confederacy before the
Peace of 1648; or
+ who had at any time adhered to the nuncio's party; or
+ who had inherited his property from anyone who had been guilty
of those crimes; or
+ who had sat in any of the confederate assemblies or councils,
or acted on any commissions or powers derived from them.
Those who established their claims as "innocents", if they had
taken lands in Connaught were to be restored to their estates by
2 May, 1661, but if they had sold their lands they were to
indemnify the purchaser, and the adventurers and soldiers
dispossessed were to be at once reprised.
The "nocent" Catholics who had been in the rebellion, but who
had submitted and constantly adhered to the Peace of 1648, if
they had taken lands in Connaught, were to be bound by that
arrangement, and not restored to their former estates. If they
had served under his Majesty abroad, and not taken lands in
Connaught or Clare, they were to be restored after reprisals
made to the adventurers and soldiers. If all this was to be
accomplished, "there must" said Ormond, "be new discoveries of a
new Ireland, for the old will not serve to satisfy these
engagements. It remains, then, to determine which party must
suffer in the default of means to satisfy all." The result was
not doubtful. The Protestant interest was resolute and armed,
and threatened to use force, if necessary, to defend their
possessions. The Catholics were poor, broken, and friendless.
"All the other competing interests in Ireland were united in
their implacable malice to the Irish and in their desire that
they might gain nothing by the King's return." The King yielded
to the pressure of the Protestants, the vast majority of whom
were accessory, before or after the fact, to the execution of
his father. He declared that he was for the establishment of an
English interest in Ireland. All attempts to carry out his
father's and his own engagements were abandoned. A commission
was appointed consisting of thirty-six persons, all Protestants,
and they proceeded to appoint from amongst their body a court of
claims to hear cases and decide without a jury. Four thousand
Catholics claimed to be restored to their former estates. About
600 claims were heard, and in the great majority of cases the
claimants proved "innocency". A loud outcry arose from the
Puritan and Protestant interest. The mutterings of an intended
insurrection were heard. The anger and panic of the Cromwellians
knew no bounds. A formidable plot was discovered. A small
outbreak took place (Lord E. Fitzmaurice, "Life of Petty", p.
131). A new Bill of Settlement, or, as it was called, of
Explanation, was then approved in England, and brought in and
passed in Ireland (1665). It provided that the adventurers and
soldiers should give up one-third of their grants under the
Cromwellian settlement, to be applied for the purpose of
increasing the fund for reprisals. Protestant adventurers and
soldiers serving before 1649, and Protestant purchasers in
Connaught or Clare before 1663, removable from restorable lands,
were to receive, before the lands were restored, two-thirds
equivalent in other lands. Protestant purchasers from
transplanted persons in Connaught or Clare before 1 September,
1663, were confirmed in two-thirds of their purchase. Every
clause in this and the preceding act was to be construed most
liberally and beneficially for protecting and settling the
estates and persons of Protestants, whom the Act was principally
intended to settle and secure (S: 73). The clause in the first
act, empowering the King to restore innocent Catholics to their
houses within Corporations, was repealed (S: 221). The Anglican
Church regained its estates, including its large revenue of
tithes, and its hierarchy was replaced in its former position.
Finally (and this is the most important and iniquitous provision
in the Act) it was declared "that no person who by the
qualifications of the former Act hath not been adjudged
innocent, shall at any time hereafter be reputed innocent, so as
to obtain any lands or tenements", etc. This excluded the whole
body of the 4,000 innocent claimants, except the 600 already
disposed of "without a trial from the inheritance of their
fathers, an act of the grossest and most cruel injustice"
(Lecky, I 115). After these acts the Protestants possessed,
according to Petty, more than two-thirds of the good land, and
of the Protestant landowners in 1689, according to Archbishop
King, two-thirds held their estates under the Acts of Settlement
and Explanation.
ARTHUR UA CLERIGH
Acton, Charles Januarius
Charles Januarius Acton
An English cardinal, born at Naples, 6 March, 1803; died at
Naples, 23 June, 1847. He was the second son of Sir John Francis
Acton, Bart. The family, a cadet branch of the Actons of
Aldenham Hall, near Bridgnorth, in Shropshire, had settled in
Naples some time before his birth. His father was engaged in the
Neapolitan trade when he succeeded to the family estate and
title through the death of his cousin, Sir Richard Acton, Bart.
The Cardinal's education was English, as he and his elder
brother were sent to England on their father's death in 1811, to
a school near London kept by the Abbe Aueque. they were then
sent to Westminster School, with the understanding that their
religion was not to be interfered with. Yet, they not only were
sent to this Protestant school, but they had a Protestant
clergyman as tutor. In 1819 they went to Magdalen College,
Cambridge, where they finished their education. After this
strange schooling for a future cardinal, Charles went to Rome
when he was twenty and entered the Academia Ecclesiastica, where
ecclesiastics intending to be candidates for public offices
receive a special training. An essay of his attracted the
attention of the Secretary of State, della Somaglia, and Leo XII
made him a chamberlain and attache to the Paris Nunciature,
where he had the best opportunity to become acquainted with
diplomacy. Pius VIII recalled him and named him vice-legate,
granting him choice of any of the four legations over which
cardinals presided. He chose Bologna, as affording most
opportunity for improvement. He left there at the close of Pius
VIII's brief pontificate, and went to England, in 1829, to marry
his sister to Sir Richard Throckmorton. Gregory XVI made him
assistant judge in the Civil Court of Rome. In 1837 he was made
Auditor to the Apostolic Chamber, the highest Roman dignity
after the cardinalate. Probably this was the first time it was
even offered to a foreigner. Acton declined it, but was
commanded to retain it. He was proclaimed Cardinal-Priest, with
the title of Santa Maria della Pace, in 1842; having been
created nearly three years previously. His strength, never very
great, began to decline, and a sever attack of ague made him
seek rest and recuperation, first at Palermo and then at Naples.
But without avail, for he died in the latter city. His sterling
worth was little known through his modesty and humility. In his
youth his musical talent and genial with supplied much innocent
gaiety, but the pressure of serious responsibilities and the
adoption of a spiritual life somewhat subdued its exercise.
His judgment and legal ability were such that advocates of the
first rank said that could they know his view of a case they
could tell how it would be decided. When he communicated
anything in writing, Pope Gregory used to say he never had
occasion to read it more than once. He was selected as
interpreter in the interview which the Pope had with the Czar of
Russia. The Cardinal never said anything about this except that
when he had interpreted the Pope's first sentence the Czar said:
"It will be agreeable to me, if your Eminence will act as my
interpreter, also." After the conference Cardinal Acton, by
request of the Pope, wrote out a minute account of it; but he
never permitted it to be seen. The King of Naples urged him
earnestly to become Archbishop of Naples, but he inexorably
refused. His charities were unbounded. He once wrote from Naples
that he actually tasted the distress which he sought to solace.
He may be said to have departed this life in all the wealth of a
willing poverty.
JOHN J. A'BECKET
John Acton
John Acton
An English canonist, after 1329 canon of Lincoln; born 1350. His
name is spelled variously, Achjedune, de Athona, Aton, Eaton;
Maitland ( Roman Canon Law in the Church of England: London,
1898) and Stubbs write Ayton. He was a pupil of John Stratford
(afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury), and is declared by
Maitland (p. 98) to be "one of the three English canonists who
after the earliest years of the thirteenth century wrote books
that met with any success". He is best known as a glossator of
the legatine "Constitutions" of Cardinals Otho and Ottobone,
papal legates to England in the thirteenth century, and
contemporary lawyers must have found his notes both full and
learned, for many manuscript copies of them are said by Maitland
to be still extant at Oxford. They were first printed by Wynkyn
de Worde in his edition of William Lyndewood's "Provinciale"
(1496) and partly translated in Johnson's "Collection of
Ecclesiastical Laws" (London, 1720: cf. the English translation
of Otho's "Ecclesiastical Laws", by J. W. White, 1844). The
printed copies must be received with caution, for they contain
references to books that were not written until after the death
of Acton. His canonical doctrine lends no support to the thesis
of a medieval Anglican independence of the papal decretal
legislation. "I have been unable", says Dr. F. W. Maitland in
the work quoted below (p. 8), "to find any passage in which
either John of Ayton or Lyndewood denies, disputes, or debates
the binding force of any decretal" (cf. ib., pp. 11-14) Of Acton
the same writer says (pp. 7, 8) that he was "a little too human
to be strictly scientific. His gloss often becomes a growl
against the bad world in which he lives, the greedy prelates,
the hypocritical friars, the rapacious officials."
THOMAS J. SHAHAN
Lord Acton
John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, Baron Acton
Baron Acton, Professor of Modern History at Cambridge,
1895-1902, born at Naples, 10 January, 1834, Where his father,
Sir Richard Acton, held an important diplomatic appointment;
died at Tegernsee, Bavaria, 19 June, 1902.
His mother was the heiress of a distinguished Bavarian family,
the Dalbergs. The Actons, though of an old English Catholic
stock, had long been naturalized in Naples, where Lord Acton's
grandfather had been prime minister. The future historian was
thus in an extraordinary degree cosmopolitan, and much of his
exceptional mastery of historical literature may be ascribed to
the fact that the principal languages of Europe were as familiar
to him as his native tongue. In 1843 the boy was sent to Oscott
College, Birmingham, were Doctor, afterwards Cardinal, Nicholas
Wiseman was then president. After five years spent at Oscott,
Acton complete his education at Munich, as the pupil of the
celebrated historian Doellinger. With Doellinger he visited
France, and both there and in Germany lived on terms of intimacy
with the most eminent historical scholars of the day. Returning
to England, however, in 1859, to settle upon the family estate
of Aldenham in Shropshire, he entered parliament as member for
an Irish constituency, and retained his seat for six years,
voting with the Liberals, but taking little part in the debates.
In the meantime he devoted himself to literary work, and upon
Newman's retirement, in 1859, succeeded him in the editorship of
a Catholic periodical called "The Rambler", which, after 1862,
was transformed into a quarterly under the title of "The Home
and Foreign Review". The ultra liberal tone of this journal gave
offence to ecclesiastical authorities, and Acton eventually
judged it necessary to discontinue its publication, in April,
1864, when he wrote, concerning certain tenets of his which had
been disapproved of, that "the principles had not ceased to be
true, nor the authority which censured them to be legitimate,
because the two were in contradiction." The publication of the
"Syllabus" by Pius IX in 1864 tended to alienate Acton still
further from Ultramontane counsels. He had in the meantime
become very intimate with Mr. Gladstone, by whom he was
recommended for a peerage in 1869, and at the time of the
Vatican Council Lord Acton went to Rome with the express object
of organizing a party of resistance to the proposed definition
of papal infallibility. The decree, when it came, seems to have
had the effect of permanently embittering Acton's feelings
towards Roman authority, but he did not, like his friend
Doellinger, formally sever his connection with the Church.
Indeed in his later years at Cambridge he regularly attended
Mass, and he received the last sacraments, at Tegernsee, on his
death-bed. The Cambridge Professorship of Modern History was
offered to him by Lord Roseberry in 1895, and, besides the
lectures which he delivered there, he conceived and partly
organized the "Cambridge Modern History", the first volume of
which was only to see the light after his death. Lord Acton
never produced anything which deserves to be called a book, but
he wrote a good many reviews and occasionally an article or a
lecture. As an historian he was probably more remarkable for
knowledge of detail than for judgment or intuition. The "Letters
of Quirinus," published in the Allgemeine Zeitung", at the time
of the Vatican Council, and attributed to Lord Acton, as well as
other letters addressed to the "Times", in November, 1874, show
a mind much warped against the Roman system. The "Letters to
Mrs. Drew" (Mr. Gladstone's daughter), which we printed by Mr.
Herbert Paul in 1903, are brilliant but often bitter. A
pleasanter impression is given by another collection of Lord
Acton's private letters (published 1906) under the editorship of
Abbot Gasquet. Some of Acton's best work was contributed to the
"English Historical Review". His article on "German Schools of
History", in the first volume, and on "Doellinger's Historical
Work", in the fifth, deserve particular mention.
HERBERT THURSTON
Acton, John Francis Edward
John Francis Edward Acton
Sixth Baronet of the name, son of a Shropshire physician, born
at Besanc,on, 3 June, 1736; died at Palermo, 12 August, 1811. He
entered the military service of the Duke of Tuscany, and
distinguished himself in the Algerine war in 1775, during which
he rescued 4,000 Spaniards from the Corsairs. Since 1779 he was
engaged in the reorganization of the Neapolitan navy. He became
a favourite of Queen Caroline and was made successively minister
of the marine, of finance, and prime minister of the kingdom to
which he rendered notable services. When the Parthenopeian
Republic was established by the French at Naples in 1798, Acton
fled. After the restoration of the Bourbons he was temporarily
reinstated, but was removed in 1806, and retired to Palermo.
THOMAS J. SHAHAN
Canonical Acts
Canonical Acts
According to the old Roman jurisprudence, acts are the registers
( acta) in which were recorded the official documents, the
decisions and sentences of the judges. Acts designate in law
whatever serves to prove or justify a thing. Records, decrees,
reports, certificates, etc. are called acts. Canonical acts
derive their name from connection with ecclesiastical procedure.
Acts may be public or private, civil or ecclesiastical.
Public acts are those certified by a public notary or other
person holding a public office or position These acts may be
judicial, or a part of court-procedure, or voluntary. In
contentious trials to secure justice, the acts should be
judicial; extra judicial acts are not contentious but voluntary.
Both civil and canon law recognize as public acts those that
occur before witnesses, if these acknowledge them before the
court, otherwise they are private. Public acts include any
action taken by the judge, the authorities he may quote, the
proceedings in the court, documents drawn from the public
archives. An original document of a community, bishop, or public
officer, with the official seal, or a copy of these sent by
these persons with due authentication, is a public act. Public
acts are determinative against anyone, though at times they may
not impose personal obligation on those not participating in
them. In old public acts, the presumption is in favour of their
being rightly done; to upset their value, the burden of proof is
upon him who attacks them or argues that they were not executed
with due formalities. Ecclesiastically, an exception is made for
alienation of Church property, where, for the validity of a
deed, a further requisite may be exacted, such as a clear proof
of the authorisation of a bishop, or the consent of the chapter.
For these presumption does not suffice.
Private acts are those of one or more individuals they tell
against those who executed them, not against absent parties not
participating in them. While public acts have force from the day
of their date, private acts, whose date is not authenticated,
have force only from the day of their public registry. When
authenticated, fraud alone can upset them. If the authenticating
official overstepped his competency, the act would only be a
private act, but yet of private value, unless the law requires
for its validity the authentication of an official. Thus, a deed
transferring real estate, even signed by the parties, becomes
valid for public purposes when authenticated by the official
designated by law, though the private agreement may be a basis
for redress.
It is not easy to draw precise limits between civil and
ecclesiastical acts. While civil acts are mainly of the laity,
about secular things, and ecclesiastical acts mainly of
ecclesiastics, in connection with spiritual things, yet both
easily overlap each other. Acts are civil or ecclesiastical by
their relations with the State or the Church, by their emanation
from either, by touching upon matters belonging to either, or by
affecting the dealings of persons with either. The same
individuals are subject to both authorities. Thus ecclesiastics
do not cease to be citizens, and all Christian citizens are
subject to the authority of the Church as well as of the State.
Many things, even linked with spiritual affairs, do not lose
their natural character of temporalities. Many acts passing
between ecclesiastics are purely civil. An ecclesiastic, though
a minister of the Church, is also a citizen; his actions as a
citizen are purely civil; those emanating from him as a
clergyman are ecclesiastical. If the acts are such as could be
properly performed by a layman, they would belong to the civil
order; if their performance required the clerical state, they
are ecclesiastical. Yet a layman's spiritual duties and
exercises are ecclesiastical, coming under the authority of the
Church; an ecclesiastic's money matters come under the authority
of the State as far as those of other citizens. This is the
basis of the distinction between the civil and ecclesiastical
forum. The Church by divine right has inalienable control of
strictly spiritual things; the State of strictly temporal
things. By the goodwill of peoples and governments the Church
obtained many privileges for its forum, respecting the
temporalities of ecclesiastics, and even of the laity in matters
connected with spiritual things. In other matters assigned to
her by Divine Law she cannot yield her authority, though for
peace sake she may tolerate aggressions upon it. She may yield
(and in concordats and in other ways does yield) those
privileges which had for centuries become part of her forum.
Acts also designate certain general formalities for the validity
of documents, often essential requisites, such as the date, the
signature, the qualifications of persons, the accurate names of
witnesses, and other similar conditions which may be demanded by
civil or ecclesiastical laws or by the custom of a country.
Acts of a council are the definitions of faith, decrees, canons,
and official declarations of the council, whose sphere of action
is more or less extended according as it is oecumenical,
national, provincial, etc.
Acts of the Martyrs are the documents, narrations, and
testimonies of the arrest, interrogatories, answers, torments,
and heroic deaths of the Christians who sealed their faith by
the shedding of their blood in the times of persecution. The
documents of the Congregation of Rites connected with the
beatification and canonisation of saints are designated as Acts
of the Saints. This is also the title given by the Bollandists
to their monumental account of the lives of the saints (Acta
Sanctorum). Acts-Capitular are the official discussions of the
assembled members of the chapter, the name given to the canons
of the cathedral who form a corporation established to aid the
bishop in the government of the diocese, and to supply his place
when the see is vacant.
WAGNER, Dictionnaire de droit eccles., v. Actes (Paris, 1901);
SANTI, Pray. iur. can., II, Lib. XXII, De Fide Instrum. (New
York); SMITHY Eccles. Law, II, v, Judicial Proofs; D AVINO,
Enciclopedia dell Ecclesiastico (Turin, 1878) v. Atti; CROW ON,
Man. tot. iur. can., IV, iii, art. 3, De Instrum. (Poitiers,
1880) PIHRING, Sac. Can. Doctrines II, Lib. XXII, De Fide
Instrum (Rome, Propaganda, 1859).
R.L. BURTSELL
Human Acts
Human Acts
Acts are termed human when they are proper to man as man; when,
on the contrary, they are elicited by man, but not proper to him
as a rational agent, they are called acts of man.
NATURE
St. Thomas and the scholastics in general regard only the free
and deliberate acts of the will as human. Their view is grounded
on psychological analysis. A free act is voluntary, that is, it
proceeds from the will with the apprehension of the end sought,
or, in other words, is put forth by the will solicited by the
goodness of the object as presented to it by the understanding.
Free acts, moreover, proceed from the will's own determination,
without necessitation, intrinsic or extrinsic. For they are
those acts which the will can elicit or abstain from eliciting,
even though all the requisites of volition are present. They,
consequently, are acts to which the will is determined neither
by the object nor by its own natural dispositions and habits,
but to which it determines itself. The will alone is capable of
self-determination or freedom; the other faculties, as the
understanding, the senses, the power of motion, are not free;
but some of their acts are controlled by the will and so far
share its freedom indirectly. The active indeterminateness of
the will, its mastery over its own actions, is consequent upon
the deliberation of reason. For the intellect discerns in a
given object both perfection and imperfection, both good and
evil, and therefore presents it to the will as desirable in one
respect and undesirable in another. But when an object is thus
proposed, the will, on account of its unlimited scope, may love
or hate, embrace or reject it. The resultant state of the will
is indifference, in which it has the power to determine itself
to either alternative. Hence, whenever there is deliberation in
the understanding, there is freedom in the will, and the
consequent act is free; vice versa, whenever an act proceeds
from the will without deliberation, it is not free, but
necessary. Wherefore, as deliberate and free actions, so
indeliberate and necessary actions are identical. The free act
of the will thus analysed is evidently the act proper to man as
a rational agent. For it is man who is its determining cause;
whereas his necessary actions are unavoidably determined by his
nature and environment. He is the master of the former, while
the latter are not under his dominion and cannot be withheld by
him. These, therefore, are properly styled acts of man, because
elicited, but not determined, by him. The human act admits of
increment and decrement. Its voluntariness can be diminished or
increased. Ignorance, as far as it goes, renders an act
involuntary, since what is unknown cannot be willed; passions
intensify the inclination of the will, and thus increase
voluntariness, but lessen deliberation and consequently also
freedom.
PROPERTIES
Human acts are imputable to man so as to involve his
responsibility, for the very reason that he puts them forth
deliberatively and with self-determination. They are, moreover,
not subject to physical laws which necessitate the agent, but to
a law which lays the will under obligation without interfering
with his freedom of choice. Besides, they are moral. For a moral
act is one that is freely elicited with the knowledge of its
conformity with or difformity from, the law of practical reason
proximately and the law of God ultimately. But whenever an act
is elicited with full deliberation, its relationship to the law
of reason is adverted to. Hence human acts are either morally
good or morally bad, and their goodness or badness is imputed to
man. And as, in consequence, they are worthy of praise or blame,
so man, who elicits them, is regarded as virtuous or wicked,
innocent or guilty, deserving of reward or punishment. Upon the
freedom of the human act, therefore, rest imputability and
morality, man's moral character, his ability to pursue his
ultimate end not of necessity and compulsion, but of his own
will and choice; in a word, his entire dignity and preeminence
in this visible universe.
RECENT VIEWS
Recent philosophic speculation discards free will conceived as
capability of self-determination. The main reason advanced
against it is its apparent incompatibility with the law of
causation. Instead of indeterminism, determinism is now most
widely accepted. According to the latter, every act of the will
is of necessity determined by the character of the agent and the
motives which render the action desirable. Character, consisting
of individual dispositions and habits, is either inherited from
ancestors or acquired by past activity; motives arise from the
pleasurableness or unpleasurableness of the action and its
object, or from the external environment. Many determinists drop
freedom, imputability, and responsibility, as inconsistent with
their theory. To them, therefore, the human act cannot be
anything else than the voluntary act. But there are other
determinists who still admit the freedom of will. In their
opinion a free action is that which "flows from the universe of
the character of the agent." And as "character is the
constitution of Self as a whole", they define freedom as "the
control proceeding from the Self as a whole, and determining the
Self as a whole." We find freedom also defined as a state in
which man wills only in conformity with his true, unchanged) and
untrammelled personality. In like manner Kant, though in his
"Critique of Pure Reason" he advocates determinism, nevertheless
in his "Fundamental Metaphysics of Morals" admits the freedom of
the will, conceiving it as independence of external causes. The
will, he maintains, is a causality proper to rational beings,
and freedom is its endowment enabling it to act without being
determined from without, just as natural necessity is the need
proper to irrational creatures of being determined to action by
external influence. He adds, however, in explanation, that the
will must act according to unchangeable laws, as else it would
be an absurdity. Free acts thus characterised are termed human
by these determinists, because they proceed from man's reason
and personality. But plainly they are not human in the
scholastic acceptation, nor in the full and proper sense. They
are not such, because they are not under the dominion of man.
True freedom, which makes man master of his actions, must be
conceived as immunity from all necessitation to act. So it was
understood by the scholastics. They defined it as immunity from
both intrinsic and extrinsic necessitation. Not so the
determinists. According to them it involves immunity from
extrinsic, but not from intrinsic, necessitation. Human acts,
therefore, as also imputability and responsibility, are not the
same thing in the old and in the new schools.
So it comes to pass, that, while nowadays in ethics and law the
very same scientific terms are employed as in former ages, they
no longer have the same meaning as in the past nor the same in
Catholic as in non-Catholic literature.
MASER, Psychology (4th ed., New York, 1900); LADD, Psychology,
xxvi (4th ed., New York, 1903); MACKENZIE, Manual of Ethics (4th
ed., New York, 1901); SUAREZ, Tract de Voluntario; OFFNER,
Willensfreiheit, Zurechnung, und Verantwortung (Leipzig, 1904).
JOHN J. MING
Indifferent Acts
Indifferent Acts
A human act may be considered in the abstract ( in specie) or in
the concrete ( in individuo). Taken in the former sense it is
clear the morality of a human act will be determined by its
object only, as this may be of a kind that is neither
conformable to a moral norm nor contrary to it, we may have an
act that can be said to be neither good nor bad, but
indifferent. But can this character of indifference be
predicated of the act we are discussing, considered not as an
abstraction of the mind, but in the concrete, as it is exercised
by the individual in particular circumstances, and for a certain
end?
To this question St. Bonaventure (in 2, dist. 41, a. 1, q. 3,
where, however, it will be observed, the Seraphic Doctor speaks
directly of merit only) answers in the affirmative, and with him
Scotus (in 2, dist. 40-41, et quodl. 18), and all the Scotist
school. So also Sporer (Theol. Moral., 1, III, S: v); Elbel
(Theol. Moral., tom. I, n. 86); Vasquez (in 1-2, disp. 52);
Arriaga (De Act. Hum., disp. 21); and in our own day Archbishop
Walsh (De Act. Hum., n. 588 sq.). St. Thomas (In 2, dist. 40.,
a. 5; De Malo, q. 2, a. 4 et 5; 1-2, q. 18, a. 9), and his
commentators hold the opposite opinion. So too do Suarez (De.
Bon. Et Mal., disp. Ix); Billuart (diss. IV, a. 5 et 6); St.
Alphonsus (L. 2, n. XLIV); Bouquillon (Theol. Moral. Fund., n.
371); Lehmkuhl (Theol. Moral., L. I, tract. I, III); and Noldin
(Sum. Theol. Moral., I, 85 sq.).
It must be noted that the Thomists, no less than the Scotists,
recognize as morally indifferent acts done without deliberation,
such, for instance, as the stroking of one's beard or the
rubbing of one's hands together, as these ordinarily take place.
Admittedly indifferent, too, will those acts be in which there
is but a physical deliberation, as it is called, such as is
realized when, for instance, we deliberately read or write,
without any thought of the moral order. The question here is of
those acts only that are performed with advertence to a moral
rule. Again, most of the Thomists will allow that an act would
be indifferent in the case where an agent would judge it to be
neither good nor bad after he had formed his conscience,
according to the opinion of Scotists, to which, it must be
conceded, a solid probability is attached. Finally, it must be
remarked that no controversy is raised regarding the
indifference of acts with reference to supernatural merit. The
doctrine that all the works of infidels are evil has been
formally condemned. Yet clearly, while the deeds of those
without grace may be morally good, and thus in the supernatural
order escape all demerit, they cannot, at the same time, lay
claim to any merit.
Both the Thomists and Scotists will declare that, to be morally
good, an act must be in conformity with the exigencies and
dignity of our rational nature. But the question is, what is to
be reckoned as conformable to the exigencies and dignity of our
rational nature? According to the Scotists, the deliberate act
of a rational being, to be morally good, must be referred to a
positively good end. Hence those acts in which the agent adverts
to no end, and which have for their object nothing that is
either conformable to our rational nature, nor yet contrary to
it, such as eating, drinking, taking recreation, and the like,
cannot be accounted morally good. Since, however, these discover
no deviation from the moral norm, they cannot be characterized
as evil, and so therefore, it is said, must be considered as
indifferent.
According to the opinion of St. Thomas, which is the more common
one among theologians, it is not necessary, in order to be
morally good, that an act should be referred to a positively
good end. It is enough that the end is seen to be not evil, and
that in the performance of the act the bounds set by right
reason be not transgressed. Thus the acts of eating, drinking,
taking recreation, and the like, while, in the abstract, they
are neither conformable nor contrary to our rational nature, in
the concrete, by reason of the circumstance of their being done
in the manner and the measure prescribed by reason, become fully
in accord with our rational nature, and hence morally good. It
will be observed from the foregoing that the Thomists hold as
morally good the acts which the Scotists maintain to be only
morally indifferent.
According to a third class of theologians, a deliberate act
which is not referred to a positively good end must be reputed
as morally evil. Hence that which we have described as good in
the doctrine of St. Thomas, and as indifferent to the mind of
Scotus, must according to these theologians, be deemed nothing
else than bad. Wrongly styled Thomists, the advocates of this
opinion are one with the Angelic Doctor only in declaring that
there are no indifferent deliberate acts. They differ from him
radically in the unwarrantable rigour, and their teaching is
condemned by the sense and practice of even the most delicately
conscientious persons.
JOHN WEBSTER MELODY
Acts of the Apostles
Acts of the Apostles
In the accepted order of the books of the New Testament the
fifth book is called The Acts of the Apostles ( praxeis
Apostolon). Some have thought that the title of the book was
affixed by the author himself. This is the opinion of Cornely in
his "Introduction to the Books of the New Testament" (second
edition, page 315). It seems far more probable, however, that
the name was subsequently attached to the book just as the
headings of the several Gospels were affixed to them. In fact,
the name, Acts of the Apostles, does not precisely convey the
idea of the contents of the book; and such a title would
scarcely be given to the work by the author himself.
CONTENT
The book does not contain the Acts of all the Apostles, neither
does it contain all the acts of any Apostle. It opens with a
brief notice of the forty days succeeding the Resurrection of
Christ during which He appeared to the Apostles, "speaking the
things concerning the Kingdom of God". The promise of the Holy
Ghost and the Ascension of Christ are then briefly recorded. St.
Peter advises that a successor be chosen in the place of Judas
Iscariot, and Matthias is chosen by lot. On Pentecost the Holy
Ghost descends on the Apostles, and confers on them the gift of
tongues. To the wondering witnesses St. Peter explains the great
miracle, proving that it is the power of Jesus Christ that is
operating. By that great discourse many were converted to the
religion of Christ and were baptized, "and there were added unto
them in that day about three thousand souls". This was the
beginning of the Judeo-Christian Church. "And the Lord added to
them day by day those that were being saved." Peter and John
heal a man, lame from his mother's womb, at the door of the
Temple which is called Beautiful. The people are filled with
wonder and amazement at the miracle and run together unto Peter
and John in the portico that was called Solomon's. Peter again
preaches Jesus Christ, asserting that by faith in the name of
Jesus the lame man had been made strong. "And many of them that
heard the word believed", and the number of the men came to be
about five thousand. But now "the priests, and the prefect of
the Temple and the Sadducees came upon them, being sorely
troubled because they taught the people, and proclaimed in Jesus
the resurrection from the dead. And they laid hands on them, and
put them in prison unto the morrow." On the morrow Peter and
John are summoned before rulers, elders, and scribes, among whom
were present Annas, the High-Priest, Caiphas, and as many as
were of the kindred of the High-Priest. And when they had set
Peter and John in the midst they inquired: "By what power, or in
want name have ye done this?" Then Peter, filled with the Holy
Ghost, answering gave utterance to one of the most sublime
professions of the Christian faith ever made by man: "Be it
known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that in the
name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God
raised from the dead, in this name doth this man stand here
before you whole. He [Jesus] is the stone which was set at
naught by you the builders, which was made the head of the
corner [Isaias, xxviii, 16; Matt., xxi, 42]. And in no other is
there salvation: For neither is there any other name under
Heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved." The
members of the council were brought face to face with the most
positive evidence of the truth of the Christian religion. They
command the two Apostles to go aside out of the council, and
then they confer among themselves, saying "What shall we do with
these men? For that indeed a notable miracle hath been wrought
through them, is manifest to all that dwell in Jerusalem; and we
cannot deny it". Here is one of the splendid instances of that
great cumulus of evidence upon which the certitude of the
Christian Faith rests. A bitterly hostile council of the chief
Jews of Jerusalem is obliged to declare that a notable miracle
had been wrought, which it cannot deny, and which is manifest to
all that dwell in Jerusalem.
With dreadful malice the council attempts to restrain the great
movement of Christianity. They threaten the Apostles, and charge
them not to speak at all or teach in the name of Jesus; Peter
and John contemn the threat, calling upon the council to judge
whether it be right to hearken unto the council rather than unto
God. The members of the council could not inflict punishment
upon the two Apostles, on account of the people, who glorified
God on account of the great miracle. Peter and John, being freed
from custody, return to the other Apostles. They all give glory
to God and pray for boldness to speak the word of God. After the
prayer the place shakes, and they are filled with the Holy
Ghost.
The fervour of the Christians at that epoch was very great. They
were of one heart and soul; they had all things in common. As
many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them and
delivered the price to the Apostles, and this money was
distributed as anyone had need. But a certain Ananias, with
Saphira his wife, sold a possession and kept back part of the
price, the wife being accessory to the deed. St. Peter is
inspired by the Holy Ghost to know the deception, and rebukes
Ananias for the lie to the Holy Ghost. At the rebuke the man
falls dead. Saphira, coming up afterwards, and knowing nothing
of the death of her husband, is interrogated by St. Peter
regarding the transaction. She also keeps back a part of the
price, and lyingly asserts that the full price has been brought
to the Apostles. St. Peter rebukes her, and she also falls dead
at his words. The multitude saw in the death of Ananias and
Saphira God's punishment, and great fear came upon all. This
miracle of God's punishment of sin also confirmed the faith of
those that believed and drew disciples to them. At this stage of
the life of the Church miracles were necessary to attest the
truth of her teaching, and the power of miracles was abundantly
bestowed upon the Apostles. These miracles are not reviewed in
detail in Acts, but it is stated: "And by the hands of the
apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people"
(Acts. v, 12). Multitudes both of men and women were added to
the Christian community. The people of Jerusalem carried out the
sick and laid them on beds and couches in the streets that the
shadow of St. Peter might fall on them. They brought the sick
from the cities round about Jerusalem, and every one was healed.
The most powerful sect among the Jews at this epoch were the
Sadducees. They were especially opposed to the Christian
religion on account of the doctrine of the resurrection of the
dead. The cardinal truth of the Apostles' teaching was: Life
Everlasting through Jesus, Who was crucified for our sins, and
Who is risen from the dead. The High-Priest Annas favored the
Sadducees, and his son Ananus. who afterwards became
High-Priest, was a Sadducee (Josephus, Antiq., XX, viii). These
fierce sectaries made with Annas and Caiphas common cause
against the Apostles of Christ, and cast them again into prison.
The Acts leaves us in no doubt as to the motive that inspired
the High-Priest and the sectaries: "They were filled with
jealousy". The religious leaders of the Old Law saw their
influence with the people waning before the power which worked
in the Apostles of Christ. An angel of the Lord by night opened
the prison doors, and brought the Apostles out, and bade them go
and preach in the Temple. The council of the Jews, not finding
Peter and John in the prison, and learning of their miraculous
deliverance, are much perplexed. On information that they are
teaching In the Temple, they send and take them, but without
violence fearing the people. It is evident throughout that the
common people are disposed to follow the Apostles; the
opposition comes from the priests and the classes, most of the
latter being Sadducees. The council accuses the Apostles that,
contrary to its former injunction not to teach in Christ's name,
they had filled Jerusalem with Christ's teaching. Peter's
defence is that they must obey God rather than men. He then
boldly reiterates the doctrine of the Redemption and of the
Resurrection. The council is minded to kill the Apostles. At
this point Gamaliel, a Pharisee, a doctor of the Jewish law,
held in honour of all the people, arises in the council in
defence of the Apostles. He cites precedents to prove that, if
the New Teaching be of men, it will be overthrown; and if it be
of God, it will be impossible to overthrow it. Gamaliel's
counsel prevails, and the council calls the Apostles, beats
them, and lets them go, charging them not to speak in the name
of Jesus. But the Apostles departed, rejoicing that they were
counted worthy to suffer dishonour for the Name. And every day,
in the Temple and privately they ceased not to teach and to
preach Jesus the Christ.
A murmuring having arisen of the Grecian Jews, that their widows
were neglected in the daily ministration, the Apostles, deeming
it unworthy that they should forsake the word of God and serve
tables, appoint seven deacons to minister. Chief among the
deacons was Stephen, a man full of the Holy Spirit. He wrought
great signs and wonders among the people. The anti-Christian
Jews endeavour to resist him, but are not able to withstand the
wisdom and the spirit by which he speaks. They suborn witnesses
to testify that he has spoken against Moses and the Temple.
Stephen is seized and brought into the council. False witnesses
testify that they have heard Stephen say that "this Jesus of
Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs
which Moses delivered to us". All who sat in the council saw
Stephen's face, as it had been the face of an angel. He makes a
defence, in which he reviews the chief events in the first
covenant, and its relation to the New Law. They rush upon
Stephen, drag him out of the city, and stone him to death. And
he kneels down and prays: "Lord, lay not this sin to their
charge", and dies. Beginning with the martyrdom of Stephen, a
great persecution arose against the Church at Jerusalem; all
were scattered abroad throughout Judea and Samaria, except the
Apostles. The leader of the persecution was Saul, afterwards to
become the great St. Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles. The
deacon Philip first preaches in Samaria with great fruit. Like
all the preachers of the first days of the Church, Philip
confirms his preaching by great miracles. Peter and John go up
to Samaria and confirm the converts whom Philip had made.
Philip, commanded by an angel, goes down the road from Jerusalem
to Gaza, and on the way converts and baptizes the eunuch of
Candace Queen of Ethiopia. Philip is thence transported by
Divine power to Azotus and preaches to all the coast cities
until be comes to Caesarea.
Saul, breathing threatening and slaughter against the disciples
of the Lord, sets out for Damascus to apprehend any Christians
whom he may find there. As he draws near to Damascus, the Lord
Jesus speaks to him out of the heavens and converts him. St.
Paul is baptized by Ananias at Damascus, and straightway for
some days abides there, preaching in the synagogues that Jesus
Christ is the Son of God. He withdraws into Arabia; again
returns to Damascus; and after three years be goes up to
Jerusalem. At Jerusalem Paul is at first distrusted by the
disciples of Jesus; but after Barnabas narrates to them Paul's
marvellous conversion, they receive Paul, and he preaches boldly
in the name of Jesus, disputing especially against the Grecian
Jews. They plot to kill him; but the Christians bring Paul down
to Caesarea, and send him forth to Tarsus, his native city.
At this epoch Acts describes the Church in Judea, Samaria, and
Galilee as "at peace, being builded up, and walking in the fear
of the Lord, and by the strength of the Holy Ghost it was
multiplied". Peter now goes throughout all parts comforting the
faithful. At Lydda he heals the palsied AEneas; and at Joppa he
raises the pious widow Tabitha (Greek, Dorcas) from the dead.
These miracles still more confirm the faith in Jesus Christ. At
Joppa Peter has the great vision of the sheet let down from
Heaven containing all manner of animals, of which he, being in a
trance, is commanded to kill and eat. Peter refuses, on the
ground that he cannot eat that which is common and unclean.
Whereupon it is made known to him from God, that God has
cleansed what was before to the Jew unclean. This great vision,
revealed three times, was the manifestation of the will of
Heaven that the ritual law of the Jews should cease; and that
henceforth salvation should be offered without distinction to
Jew and Gentile. The meaning of the vision is unfolded to Peter,
when he is commanded by an angel to go to Caesarea, to the
Gentile centurion Cornelius, whose messengers were even then
come to fetch him. He goes, and hears from Cornelius also the
centurion's own vision. He preaches to him and to all assembled;
the Holy Ghost descends upon them, and Peter commands that they
be baptized. Returning to Jerusalem, the Jews contend with Peter
that he has gone in to men uncircumcised, and eaten with them.
He expounds to them his vision at Joppa, and also the vision of
Cornelius, wherein the latter was commanded by an angel to send
and fetch Peter from Joppa, that he might receive from Peter the
Gospel. The Jews acquiesce, glorifying God, and declaring that
"unto the Gentiles also hath God granted repentance unto life".
Those who had been scattered abroad from Jerusalem at the time
of Stephen's martyrdom had travailed as far as Phoenicia,
Cyprus, and Antioch preaching Christ; but they preached to none
save the Jews. The calling of the Gentiles was not yet
understood by them. But now some converts from Cyprus and Cyrene
come up to Antioch, and preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. A
great number believe, and turn to the Lord. The report of the
work at Antioch comes to the ears of the Church in Jerusalem;
and they send Barnabas, "a good man full of the Holy Ghost and
of faith", to them. He takes Paul from Tarsus, and they both
dwell at Antioch a whole year, and teach many people. The
disciples of Christ are called Christians first at Antioch.
The rest of Acts narrates the persecution of the Christians by
Herod Agrippa; the mission of Paul and Barnabas from Antioch by
the Holy Ghost, to preach to the Gentile nations; the labours of
Paul and Barnabas in Cyprus and in Asia Minor, their return to
Antioch; the dissension at Antioch concerning circumcision; the
journey of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem, the decision of the
Apostolic Council of Jerusalem, the separation of Paul from
Barnabas, in whose stead he takes Silas, or Silvanus; Paul's
visit to his Asiatic Churches, his foundation of the Church at
Philippi; Paul's sufferings for Jesus Christ; Paul's visit to
Athens, his foundation of the churches of Corinth and of
Ephesus; Paul's return to Jerusalem, his persecution by the
Jews; Paul's imprisonment at Caesarea; Paul's appeal to Caesar,
his voyage to Rome; the shipwreck; Paul's arrival at Rome, and
the manner of his life there. We see therefore that a more
proper title of this book would be "The Beginnings of the
Christian Religion". It is an artistic whole, the fullest
history which we possess of the manner in which the Church
developed.
THE ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH
In Acts we see the fulfilment of Christ's promises. In Acts, i,
8, Jesus had declared that the Apostles should receive power
when the Holy Ghost should come upon them, and should be His
witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and
unto the uttermost parts of the earth. In John, xiv, 12, Jesus
had declared: "He that believeth in me, the works that I do, he
also shall do, and greater works than these shall he do. Because
I go to the Father". In these passages is found the key-note of
the origin of the Church. The Church developed according to the
plan conceived by Christ. There is, assuredly, in the narration
evidence of the working out of a great plan; for the reason that
the writer records the working out of the great design of
Christ, conceived in infinite wisdom, and executed by omnipotent
power. There is throughout a well-defined, systematic order of
narration, an exactness and fullness of detail. After the
calling of the first twelve Apostles, there is no event in the
history of the Church so important as Paul's conversion and
commission to teach in Christ's name. Up to Paul's conversion,
the inspired historian of the Acts has given us a condensed
statement of the growth of the Church among the Jews. Peter and
John are prominent in the work. But the great message is now to
issue forth from the confines of Judaism; all flesh is to see
the salvation of God; and St. Paul is to be the great instrument
in preaching Christ to the Gentiles. In the development of the
Christian Church Paul wrought more than all the other Apostles;
and therefore in Acts St. Paul stands forth, the prominent agent
of God in the conversion of the world. His appointment as the
Apostle of the Gentiles does not prevent him from preaching to
the Jews, but his richest fruits are gathered from the Gentiles.
He fills proconsular Asia, Macedonia, Greece, and Rome with the
Gospel of Christ; and the greater part of Acts is devoted
exclusively to recording his work.
DIVISION OF BOOK
In the Acts there are no divisions of the narration contemplated
by the author. It is open to us to divide the work as we deem
fit. The nature of the history therein recorded easily suggests
a greater division of Acts into two parts:
+ The beginning and propagation of the Christian religion among
the Jews (1-9);
+ The beginning and propagation of the Christian religion among
the Gentiles (10-28). St. Peter plays the chief role in the
first part; St. Paul, in the second part.
OBJECT
The Acts of the Apostles must not be believed to be an isolated
writing, but rather an integral part in a well-ordered series.
Acts presupposes its readers to know the Gospels; it continues
the Gospel narrative. The Four Evangelists close with the
account of the Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus Christ. St.
Mark is the only one who essays to give any of the subsequent
history, and he condenses his account into one brief sentence:
"And they went forth and preached everywhere: the Lord working
with them, and confirming the word by the signs that followed"
(Mark, xvi, 20). Now the Acts of the Apostles takes up the
narrative here and records succinctly the mighty events which
were wrought by the Holy Ghost through chosen human agents. It
is a condensed record of the fulfilment of the promises of Jesus
Christ. The Evangelists record Christ's promises which He made
to the disciples, regarding the establishment of the Church and
its mission (Matt., xvi, 15-20); the gift of the Holy Ghost
(Luke, xxiv, 49; John, xiv, 16, 17); the calling of the gentiles
(Matt., xxviii, 18-20; Luke, xxiv, 46, 47). Acts records the
fulfilment. The history begins at Jerusalem and ends at Rome.
With divine simplicity Acts shows us the growth of the religion
of Christ among the nations. The distinction between Jew and
Gentile is abolished by the revelation to St. Peter; Paul is
called to devote himself specially to the Gentile ministry, the
Holy Ghost works signs in confirmation of the doctrines of
Christ; men suffer and die, but the Church grows; and thus the
whole world sees the Salvation of God. Nowhere in Holy Writ is
the action of the Holy Ghost in the Church so forcibly set forth
as in the Acts. He fills the Apostles with knowledge and power
on Pentecost; they speak as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak;
the Holy Ghost bids Philip the deacon go to the eunuch of
Candace; the same Spirit catches up Philip, after the baptism of
the eunuch, and brings him to Azotus; the Holy Ghost tells Peter
to go to Cornelius; when Peter preaches to Cornelius and his
family the Holy Ghost falls on them all; the Holy Ghost directly
commands that Paul and Barnabas be set apart for the Gentile
ministry; the Holy Ghost forbids Paul and Silas to preach in
Asia; constantly, by the laying on of the Apostles' hands, the
Holy Ghost comes upon the faithful; Paul is directed by the Holy
Ghost in everything; the Holy Ghost foretells to him that bonds
and afflictions await him in every city; when Agabus prophesies
Paul's martyrdom, he says: "Thus saith the Holy Ghost: 'So shall
the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and
shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles' ". Acts
declares that on the Gentiles the grace of the Holy Ghost is
poured out; in the splendid description of St. Stephen's
martyrdom he is declared full of the Holy Ghost; when Peter
makes his defense before rulers, elders, and scribes, he is
filled with the Holy Ghost; often it is declared that the
Apostles are filled with the Holy Ghost; Philip is chosen as a
deacon because be is full of faith and the Holy Ghost; when
Ananias is sent to Paul at Damascus he declares that he is sent
that Paul may receive his sight and be filled with the Holy
Ghost; Jesus Christ is declared to be anointed with the Holy
Ghost; Barnabas is declared to be full of the Holy Ghost; the
men of Samaria receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of the
hands of Peter and John. This history shows the real nature of
the Christian religion; its members are baptized in the Holy
Ghost, and are upheld by His power. The source in the Church of
infallible truth in teaching, of grace, and of the power that
resists the gates of Hell is the Holy Ghost. By the power of the
Spirit the Apostles established the Church in the great centres
of the world: Jerusalem, Antioch Cyprus, Antioch of Pisidia,
Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, Philippi, Thessalonica, Beraea, Athens,
Corinth, Ephesus, and Rome. From these centres the message went
to the surrounding lands. We see in the Acts the realization of
Christ's promises just before his Ascension: "But ye shall
receive power when the Holy Ghost is come upon you; and ye shall
be my witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and Samaria,
and unto the uttermost parts of the earth". In the New Testament
Acts forms a necessary connecting-link between the Gospels and
the Epistles of St. Paul. It gives the necessary information
concerning the conversion of St. Paul and his apostolate, and
also concerning the formation of the great Churches to which St.
Paul wrote his Epistles.
AUTHENTICITY
The authenticity of the Acts of the Apostles is proved be
intrinsic evidence; it is attested by the concordant voice of
tradition. The unity of style of Acts and its artistic
completeness compel us to receive the book as the work of one
author. Such an effect could never arise from the piecing
together bits of writings of different authors. The writer
writes as an eyewitness and compaction of Paul. The passages
xvi, 10 - 17; xx, 5-15; xxi, 1-18; xxvii, 1; xxviii, 16 are
called the We passages. In these the writer uniformly employs
the first person plural, closely identifying himself with St.
Paul. This excludes the theory that Acts is the work of a
redactor. As Renan has well said, such use of the pronoun is
incompatible with any theory of redaction. We know from many
proofs that Luke was the companion and fellow-labourer of Paul.
Writing to the Colossians, in his salutation Paul associates
with himself, "Luke, the beloved physician" (iv, 14). In II
Tim., iv, 11 Paul declares: "Only Luke is with me". To Philemon
(24) Paul calls Luke his fellow-worker. Now in this article, we
may suppose the Lucan authorship of the third Gospel as proved.
The writer of Acts in his opening sentence implicitly declares
himself to be the author of the third Gospel. He addresses his
work to Theophilus, the addressee of the third Gospel; he
mentions his former work and in substance makes known his
intention of continuing the history which, in his former
treatise, he had brought up to the day when the Lord Jesus was
received up. There is an identity of style between Acts and the
third Gospel. An examination of the original Greek texts of the
third Gospel and of the Acts reveals that there is in them a
remarkable identity of manner of thinking and of writing. There
is in both the same tender regard for the Gentiles, the same
respect for the Roman Empire, the same treatment of the Jewish
rites, the same broad conception that the Gospel is for all men.
In forms of expression the third Gospel and the Acts reveal an
identity of authorship. Many of the expressions usual in both
works occur but rarely in the rest of the New Testament; other
expressions are found nowhere else save in the third Gospel and
in the Acts. If one will compare the following expressions in
the Greek, he will be persuaded that both works are of the same
author:
+ Luke, i, 1-Acts, xv, 24-25;
+ Luke, xv, 13-Acts, i, 5, xxvii, 14, xix, 11;
+ Luke, i, 20, 80-Acts, i, 2, 22, ii, 29, vii, 45;
+ Luke, iv, 34-Acts, ii, 27, iv, 27, 30;
+ Luke, xxiii, 5-Acts, x, 37;
+ Luke, i, 9-Acts, I, 17;
+ Luke, xii, 56, xxi, 35-Acts xvii, 26.
The last-cited parallel expression, to prosopon tes ges, is
employed only in the third Gospel and in Acts. The evidence of
the Lucan authorship of Acts is cumulative. The intrinsic
evidence is corroborated by the testimonies of many witnesses.
It must be granted that in the Apostolic Fathers we find but
faint allusions to the Acts of the Apostles. The Fathers of that
age wrote but little; and the injury of time has robbed us of
much of what was written. The Gospels were more prominent in the
teachings of that day and they consequently have a more abundant
witness. The canon of Muratori contains the canon of Scriptures
of the Church of Rome in the second century. Of Acts it
declares: "But the Acts of all the Apostles are written in one
book, which for the excellent Theophilus Luke wrote, because he
was an eyewitness of all". In "'The Doctrine of Addai", which
contains the ancient tradition of the Church of Edessa, the Acts
of the Apostles are declared to be a part of the Holy Scriptures
(Doctrine of Addai, ed. Phillips, 1876, 46). The twelfth,
thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth chapters of St. Irenaeus's
third book "Against Heresies" are based upon the Acts of the
Apostles. Irenaeus convincingly defends the Lucan authorship of
the third Gospel and Acts, declaring: "But that this Luke was
inseparable from Paul, and was his fellow-labourer in the
Gospel, he himself clearly evinces, not as a matter of boasting,
but as bound to do so, by the truth itself. . . And all the
remaining facts of his courses with Paul, he recounts. . . As
Luke was present at all these occurrences, he carefully noted
them down in writing, so that he cannot be convicted of
falsehood or boastfulness, etc." Irenaeus unites in himself the
witness of the Christian Church of the East and the West of the
second century. He continues unchanged the teaching of the
Apostolic Fathers. In his treatise "On Fasting" Tertullian
accepts Acts as Holy Scripture, and calls them the "Commentary
of Luke".